Who are the Quranists? 

Most Muslims these days know more about Hadiths than Quran 🤦🏽‍♂️

This bears similarities to the Karaite sect within Judaism. The Karaites reject the Talmud as a legal document and believe that only the Torah (5 books of Moses) should be used for Jewish law.

Wow. Imagine if Christians had a Bible and then another book called "life of Jesus" written by some German 200 years after Christ and we use that second book as an authority over the Bible. This is ridiculous! I as a Christian fully support these Quranists

In the Quran, it states the Quran is fully complete and detailed- 6:114-6:115. This means nothing is missing and is all you need.

When I was studying Religious Philosophy, one of the points about Islam that came up was the historic context. The Hadiths likely were recorded later precisely because they aren't part of the Qur'an and most likely were a way for Arab, Levantine and Persian people's of the early Caliphates to keep old cultural norms in a form adapted to Islam. Personally I think the Quranists have a major point because of this, the Hadiths say some less than savoury things to modern ears but that aren't necessarily inherent to Islam as a religion

I don't know your name, but admitting that you know more than a common MUslim, more tolerant than a religious leader. How can you be so awesome? I am a old Muslim. 66 years I passed as a dedicated Muslim. But there were many many times I became frustrated and inquisitive about our traditional Hadiths. Quran itself is a complete book and a complete guideline. If I follow all words of Quran and nothing from Hadith (Hadis) , Will my creator going to punish me for following Quran's words but hot the man made Hadith or will my creator award me the Paradise? In my own educated belief is Quran is sufficient enough. Period!

Love your work. As a non-believer, I find joy and fulfillment of my curiosity by pursuing the knowledge of religion. Thanks to your videos, I get to learn about the nuances of many religions, including Islam.

A number of years ago, I came across an Islamic website with links to many quite well written, well researched and well argued articles. The website's purpose was to use rational arguments to defend Islam against all of the negative stereotypes (terrorism, suicide bombers, honour-killings, etc). The articles often cited Koranic verses to support their arguments. The arguments in many of the articles proceeded from a Quranist premise - the argument often went that, if a certain practice is not advocated or mandated in any verse of the Quran, then it's not Islam, therefore you can't blame Islam for practices which are not advocated or mandated in any Koranic verse.

Anytime I read the Quran I feel protected, relieved and a lot of it makes so much sense as I've gained some knowledge but when I read the hadiths it confuses me about what is being said.

My man's pronunciation is Native-Arabic!

What a logical and wonderfully educational way to give insight into basic questions that we all have. Love it

When I was studying Islam years ago, it occurred to me that the Hadiths were problematic and the Quran should probably be the only text considered authoritative. I didn't realize that this was actually some sort of movement, however.

The way he pronounces "Ahl-al Hadith" 4:12 RESPECT

Thank you for this educational piece. Keep up the excellent work! 🇨🇦

Thanks for this video,,,it's really academic and has covered most of details about quransim. I'm Quranist, and Quranists can't show their beliefs without being harassed by other muslims sects, I have lost my job due to my religious convictions..

Prayer does not come from the Hadith, but from the practical Sunnah (the practical transmission of Traditions from the Prophet to his community up to the day) which Quranists do not reject. This does not negate, that lots of Hadith collections speak about prayer, but the prayer itself is rooted in practical guidance by the prophet.

Major Misconception Clarification: Uthmān the 3rd Khalīfah was not the first to compile the Qur'ān into one book. Rather he only standardised its script and nothing more. Some of the sahabah already had personal copies of the Qur'ān during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and the time of the first Khalīfah Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه.

Some often-overlooked nuances deserve attention. Sunnah refers to a practice, while God's Sunnah-His unchanging way-is explicitly mentioned in the Quran in verses 48:23, 33:62, and 35:43. Hadith, on the other hand, is a report of the sayings, actions, or approvals of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). It is estimated that 70-80% of Hadiths are bil ma'na-where the meaning is preserved but not the exact words of the Prophet. Hadith apologists often argue that Hadiths are necessary to fill gaps in the Quranic revelation, but this is not entirely accurate. For instance, when it comes to the prescribed units of prayer (rak'ahs), no single Hadith or even a single collection provides the complete set of instructions. To arrive at the total count of 17 rak'ahs (2 for Fajr, 4 for Dhuhr, 4 for Asr, 3 for Maghrib, and 4 for Isha), one must refer to multiple Hadiths across different books. This suggests that there isn't a "gap" in revelation as some claim. Islamic theology is transmitted through the Quran, and the practices are preserved through continuous practical transmission-Muslims around the world have followed the Prophet’s practices daily since his time. Moreover, these practices aren't solely attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) but are rooted in the practices of the Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him), as indicated in Quran 16:123. Importantly, Islam was declared complete by God in March 632 CE, as stated in Quran 5:3.

It is narrated by Abu Hurrairah that the Prophet said: "Do not believe everything you read on the internet." Sahih-al-Bukhari Kitab ul internet Hadith number 101

🌹 thank you for the shout out for Hassan Farhan al-Maliki! And this was a very good round up and very accurate. An important element though that I think you missed is the consideration that most of the major practical issues are not really taken from Hadith, the go to example being prayer/salat. No Muslim really learns it from Hadith, nor, if you give to give someone, who has never seen a Muslim pray, all the Hadiths on prayer, could he/she ever come up with the traditional salat. They are not detailed and descriptive enough and often just argue about minor details on the assumption that you know the prayer. So perhaps that kind of a discussion ... a sort of Hadith vs Sunna vs mass transgenerationally inherited practices, and how that relates to Quranism, is needed in this video. Still a very good informative video, thank you for posting it. The admission near beginning that the majority of Islam is in actuality based on the Hadith and not the Qur'an is refreshing. 👍 This is only the 3rd video I've seen from your channel and I am very impressed so far

As a non-denominational Muslim I want to thank you for the effort you're doing in making very informative videos and researching every topic related to religions. I wished that you would mention that Not all the hadiths are problematic, as it depends on two factors: 1- The authenticity of the hadith because not all hadiths are considered authentic. 2- The number of people who transmitted the hadith, some hadiths were transmitted by one or two people who are mostly companions of the prophet Muhammad when hadith was collected, while others were transmitted by more than five people and I think they can be problematic depending on the topic or the context.

This particular group is really interesting to me. I would love to see more videos about them.

If hadith tells me take care of neighbor it's true because it goes with Qur'an. But if it tells something that contradict Qur'an I don't believe it.

Regarding the problem of rituals, I don't see the lack of detailed instructions on prayer in the Quran for instance as an issue. The reality is enough people watched the prophet pray that we don't need hadiths for that. And even then people still don't pray exactly the same way. The other reason is that Islam in reality was not meant to be hyper ritualistic but rather as the Quran tells us to provoke people to use Reason.

If quranism is to be 100% trusting of the Quran over everything including hadith I am therefore a quranist :)

I have a lot of respect for Quranism and even went through a Quranist phase myself. You summed up in this video the biggest issue I had with it too: a lot of the religious rituals are indeed difficult to practice without referring to the hadith. The common arguments I've seen around this, though, are that the specifics of these practices have been passed down through the generations, thus nobody really looks towards hadith on how to perform them. While that may be true it doesn't consider the fact that these details that are being passed down may have originally come from the oral tradition that later got written down as hadith.

You did a better job than any Muslim that I know. I really appreciate your details and narrations.

As a Muslim I used to wonder why do you need Hadith if Quran is perfect.

a rich and unbiased presentation of islam and muslims. It is amazing.

Your videos are very informative and academic, without much bias. Thanks for taking the time and making such contents

One of the best books to read on the subject is : "The Quran , Morality and Critical Reason" by The Late Mohamed Shahrour ,Translated by : Andreas Christmann. Shahrur is at the moment the most innovative intellectual thinker in the Arab Middle East. Often described as the ‘Martin Luther of Islam,’ he offers a liberal, progressive reading of Islam that aims to counter the influences of religious fundamentalism and radical politics. Shahrur’s innovative interpretation of the Qur’an offers groundbreaking new ideas, based on his conviction that centuries of historical Islam, including scholarship in the traditional Islamic religious sciences, have obscured or even obliterated the Qur’an’s progressive and revolutionary message. That message is one that has endured through each period of human history in which Islam has existed, encouraging Muslims to apply the most contemporary perspective available to interpret the Qur’an’s meaning.

I am a Quran centric Muslim. I will gladly answer questions as long as they are asked honestly and respectfully. Peace

I'd like to see a video on how the Qu'ran was compiled during and after the prophet's death!

Mate, your fantastic. Thank you for this!

im muslim whole my life and never heard Quranists before.........my local Mosque dead no teaching going on at all,,,,,,fighting each other........i have learned a lot here.......thank you man

Bukhari and all the scholars are not prophet or messengers. God did not give his message to Bukhari or any scholar. Mohammad is not an Idol. The Quran is complete. Reject the Hadith.

The Qua'ran as the only source of revelation seems similar to what the Protestant churches think regarding the Bible, in comparison with the traditional Catholic and Orthodox Canon

The amazing science of Hadith Which eye is dajjal blind of? Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). made a mention of Dajjil in the presence of the people and said: Allah is not one-eyed and behold that Dajjal is blind of the *right eye* and his eye would be like a floating grape. Sahih Muslim 41:7005 Hudhalfa reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Dajjal is blind of *left eye* with thick hair and there would be a garden and fire with him and his fire would be a garden and his garden would be fire. Sahih Muslim 41:7010

I had known one group in Lahore in the 1990s. They did not call themselves the Quranists, but they were sceptical of Hadith and critical of the Imams. They believed that the Quran provided all the guidance and information, including the performance of Salat, etc.

the Jews created the Talmud, Christians follow Pauls epistles and Muslims follow Hadiths.. All of them have done the same error.. leaving word of God and following man-made religions

MAY ALLAH SUBHANAHU WA TAALA BLESS YOU MY QURANIST BROTHERS AND SISTERS

The Quran is supposedly eternal or at least created by God himself, so it gets a pass. What I really don't understand is that how billions of Muslims around the world can go about their lives not questioning the Hadith at all. It's pretty much agreed upon by everybody that the Hadith is not the work of God AND was written by people from collecting people's testimonies. That's a huge, huge red flag. Have they never questioned the validity of the chain? The Gospels are presented as different versions of the same story from different sources. It is presented in that way precisely because people understood that people's memory could be faulty. The Gospels just coincidentally more or less coincided and reached consensus. The Gospels are presented as primary sources for people to judge on their own on how to make of them. The Hadith on the other hand was curated to present whoever collected them or is presenting them to reflect on what they deemed to have been legitimate events.

I became quranist lately and because the Quran encourage you to think for yourself and always criticize the following of others without thinking so the way selfi teach is the opposite of what Quran teach in this regard.

Thank you for this video, sir. Could you please provide the reference for the early Muslim qādhis (judges/magistrates) not making extended use of the Hadith? That would be highly appreciated. Thanks again, and Salam!

I believe in hadiths aslong as it does not contradict the Quran. Many Hadiths contradict the Quran but they allow it! I also dont believe in any hadith that creates a law without a source from the Quran, like how some hadiths allow stoning of zina. Can you make a video about Naskh, its a subject I dont know much about even as a Muslim, and I hate the argument used in Naskh.

The holy quran was compiled completed during the prophet time. "Bal huwalquranul majid fi lahwil mahfuudh".

I would most likely classify myself as a Sunni Muslim, however any hadith that clashes with the Qur'an I reject it and let me tell you, there's a whole lot. Just to give you a few examples. I don't believe in the second coming of Isa (As), the Dajjal, or the Mahdi which I believe to be a Persian folklore concept. I don't believe in the punishment of the grave, killing apostates or homosexuals etc. I don't believe the Prophet (Pbuh) married a child, or he killed a person in war etc. Or that you can't have a dog in your home. There is a lot of blasphemous hadith, it' sickening.

Before year 700 CE, all Muslims Jurists followed only Quran. So if we call Muslims who lived before year 700 CE as Quranist; then that means: Prophet Mohammad and Four Caliphs and all Muslims before year 700 CE were Quranists. Should we not walk on the Steps of Prophet Mohammad then? This makes Clear, that what you have coined as Quranists were ACTUAL REAL TRUE MUSLIMS; and after 700 CE; the People who made Islamic laws from extra-Quranic books are Not Muslims but Mushriks. Because according to Quran 5:40-48 who make Divine Judgments from other Books than Book of Allah are Zaalim Faasiq and Unbelievers. And Sunni and Shia fall in this category because they are who are making Islamic laws from those fabricated book of so called Hadiths Sunnah Seera Contexts, Fiq and Tafsirs which were neither certified by Prophet nor even by four Caliphs. According to professor of Islamic law in Columbia University, J. Schacht; it was year 720 CE when Hadiths and Sunnah started to be fabricated in the name of Mohammad. Imam Al-Ghazali writes in his Book ihya-al-Aloom that up to year 738 CE, Companions of Prophet and their followers hated to right hadiths. Professor Schacht further writes that up to year 720 CE all Muslim Jurists used to make Sharia law only from Quran and they used to say that any Sharia law taken from extra-Quranic books is erroneous. Even we read in tons of Books of Sunni sect that Prophet said: Do not write down from me any thing except Quran, and who has already written down from me any thing in addition to Quran must delete it. This shows that Extra-Quranic Hadiths and Sunnah were illegal in Islam during the era of Prophet. We read in tons of Books of Sunni sect that after the death of Prophet, caliph Abu Bakar forbade Muslims to narrate hadiths of Prophet and said: decide all matters as per Quran. This shows that Extra-Quranic Hadiths and Sunnah were illegal in Islam during the era of Caliph Abu Bakar. *We read in tons of Books of Sunni sect that Caliphs Umar burned and banned all Hadiths and equated hadith to Jewish Talmud. Caliph Umar wrote letters to city governors to erase all hadiths they find. Caliph Umar placed three Companions of Prophet under house arrest for life for hadith-mongering. Caliph Umar also refused to write book of Sunnah. This shows that Extra-Quranic Hadiths and Sunnah were illegal in Islam during the era of Caliph Umar.* We read in tons of Books of Sunni sect that Caliph Ali told Muslims in a sermon to erase all hadiths they find. When Ali was asked: What did Prophet leave behind for you guys: he said only Quran. This shows that Extra-Quranic Hadiths and Sunnah were illegal in Islam during the era of Caliph Ali. Also note that Quran forbids sects 3:103 and Quran tells in 6:159 that Sects like Sunni and Shia are out from the fold of Islam. Quran tells in 3:105, Hell is waiting sect followers. God has named us in Quran 22:78 only Muslim. *You can read all Scanned References of Arabic books in our page "True history of Hadiths and Sunnah".*

I find it very interesting that in almost every religion, there becomes a group that base Law, and social Tradition on the exact wording of the highest holy book.

Imam Maliks Al Muwatta is a book of Hadith's to an extent and is also authentic. He lived literally a generation after the Sahabah. In Medina where over 20,000 Sahabah had passed away.

I'm a quranist. The only difference between me and other muslims is I don't find the scholars teachings to be necessary to follow and that culture and islam should not be mixed but can be used together. If the Quran doesn't say it by the Quran is not the word of God. Following the prophet muhammad after the Quran is revealed has just been muhamadism which wasnt supposed to happen. People are told to follow in Muhammad's footsteps as in when he follows Allah's commands. Not his actual life for he wasn't without sin.

Allah tells us we must follow him and his prophet and those with authority over us ( ie scholars khalifs). Therefore we must also follow sunnah

I pray that God who is All-Wise and All-Knowing will continue to guide your efforts. We need much more investigation and reflection regarding the Word of God. Reading the Hadith I have found far too much interpretation and waaay too much positing by individuals who profess to know God's Will and God's intentions. Dangerous stuff, that.

Having studied alchemy throughout times and places, I see all religions as leading to the One, just different semantics and understandings of the One through the frame of reference of the time and place of the people's trying to explain it. Some religious texts are just a little better than others in explaining it. Considering myself Muslim would be much easier without some of the Hadith, but there are parts of the Hadith that resonate with me deeply. I submit to the will of the One, and I admire Muhammad for everything he sacrificed to help humanity. Peace be upon him.

These are the verses of Allah which We recite to you in truth. Then in what „Hadith“ حَدِيثٍ after Allah and His verses will they believe? [Quran 45:06]

I am a Quranist. It is a relatively simple religion that relies on personal interpretations. What a great explanation! Keep up the good work!

that is the true islam

I remember clearly when I become more interested in Quran instead of hadith. It was when I was a kid, listening imam preaching in Friday prayer. I was very angry to and questioning God because I heard imam cite one hadith that mention about a person going to hell just because a simple mistake, that mistake is related to urinates. At that time I was just thinking, is it really worth for God punishing a man in hell just because that simple mistake? To me it doesn't make sense and He is not my God because my God is the most merciful most beneficent... Since then, I end up just believing Quran instead of what we call as hear say (hadith). Reading Quran as a pure human in your innocence age (as a kid) it was very influential and I am so happy I spent my younger years with that bless.. I am 42 y.o. now and so basically I am skeptical when someone cite a hadith which is baseless in Quranic teaching. However, if that hadith say something in Quran, I usually recognize it and listen to it. By the way, there's a bunch of non sense in Muslim today that is basically derived from hadith and not from Quran. However, when I say something and try to correct it, people got mad and judge me as I know nothing about this religion. Silly... But the most common question that I receive is the question like "how do you understand Quran if you don't accept hadith and you have no teacher?" To me, it is a fair question, but from my experience, the way i understand Quran is just like the story of Moses and his teacher. Moses can't be patience and always questioning his teacher. So, I actually don't know what Quran means in one ayah.. what I do is just try to remember it and be patience, and usually months after months or years, I finally get it. Indeed it is strange, but that's the way it is. I think the best Quranic interpretation that live today is Hassan Farhan al Maliki, his point of view is like crystal clear to me.

you just nailed down💖 May Almighty grant you more knowledge. peace be upon you.

Hi Filip ! Can you make a video about A sufi saint from Indian subcontinent 's city Jhang now in Pakistan, His name Was Sultan Bahu and his sufi order was Sarwari Qadri order and he was a hanafi Sunni and His Teaching was about Visualising Name of Allah and Prophet Muhammad s.a.w and About Faqr Spiritual Concept of Poverty...

So i'm a quranist without even knowing 🤣🤣

As someone who's always very skeptic about any "ism", i feel Qur'an only Muslims or Qur'an only Islam is a fairer and less partial definition.

Idjtihad = doing any good task ( in this case : studying a religious problem or any theological researches) activily and with a maximum dedication of time and energy and integrity

Quranists have told me their view is prophet Muhammad left the quran as a book already and they point out verses that the quran already calls itself a book and they say its the people who follow hadiths that say the quran was compiled later after Muhammad and that is what they wrote in their hadiths

Very excellent video! Regarding the problem of the hadith and rituals, many Quranists believe that it is not a problem to follow the hadith if it does not conflict with the Quran. Therefore, most rituals do not conflict with the Quran. What do conflict with the Quran in the Quranists belief are some more important aspects than just rituals.

I love this channel ❤️ Greetings from Brazil 🇧🇷

Sounds a lot to me like the Catholic-Protestand divide on the apocrypha and church tradition Of course this is different , but it has parallels

As a german who grew up as a catholic christian, who called the Trinity into doubt, started reading up on the arian thought, how the Apostle Letters and Church traditions deranged the original thought of christianity and added their own cultural additions, i have come to the conclusion by now that i view mainstream Islam and their hadith and certain cultural things, in the same way, there is so many nonsensical things in there, even things that go against the Quran, i came across some that really irritated me and started researching more into the matter because i had some genuine moments where i called it all into doubt, i do think Hadith nearly pushed me away from Islam. I got a completely different view of the religion once i decided that they are not on the same level of revelation as many mainstream Muslims like to paint them. Peace be to you!

The modern day Quranists are considered a deviated sect because, although they claim to be going back to the original way of doing things, they fail to realise that those first generation people who were using the Quran and their own opinion (Rai) already had the Sunnah of the Prophet PBUH embedded in their heads. They had seen, spoken to and enjoyed the company of the Prophet PBUH. But as time went on and these people (known as Sahaba) died, their knowledge of the sayings of the Prophet, his actions and the things he approved of (including by remaining silent if he saw them and didn't speak out against them) were going to die out with them. The subsequent generation knew that in order to preserve this knowledge that the first generation had inside them they needed to record and codify it for preservation. The means they used for this codification was very strict and rigorous which is why so many hadiths are considered weak and so few as 'sound' and even less as Mutawatir (strong/successive). There is also the hadith of Aisha RA when asked about the Prophet PBUH, she said the character of the Prophet of Allah PBUH was the Quran. Meaning he embodied the teachings of the Quran and so his teachings and saying are incremental in understanding the Quran. The stance of the Quranists, is therefore very weak as how can they justify using their own Rai (reasoning) for interpreting the Quran when they have no knowledge of who the Prophet PBUH was, how he acted in certain situations, how he spoke, how he judged etc. No wonder so many of their ideas turn out to be so dangerous and destructive. The Quran and Hadith are inseparable in making the teachings of Islam.

Thanks for another great and informative! More and more people should know the Quranist movement, and the whole contemporary reform movements within Islam. Since the media always painted Islam in a monolithic manner, these kind video is much needed. As I also consider myself a Quranist, I wanted to add some nuance to the issue you've said about the 'problem' arise from the Quran-only approach. First of all, the 'problem' must surely arise when we take the hadith and the whole traditionalist literature and its info out of the equation. But the 'problem' is actually exist because the equation is view through the lens of traditional Islam. If we embrace the Quran-only perspective entirely, there is no problem. But, yes, in actuality there are still some problems left; but it is not the same problem. For example - Ṣalah. If we take the traditional elements away from ṣalah, but still cling onto the traditional perspective, Question becomes: hwo can we establish the details of ṣalah from Quran alone? But if we take the Quranist approach, we can follow details of the ṣalah that exist only within the Quran, and proceed as it is. Also, the Quranist may examine further that the term ṣalah in the Quran, may denotes something other than a ritualistic prayer. And then this is the point when more questions will rise. May be some Quranists will conclude that the ṣalah may means any form of communion with God, Or make connection to God, or to uphold the law and commandment, etc. But that is the problem that exist and can be solve only within a Quran-only framework. I hope this make sense to you. Anyway, thanks again for spreading the knowledge.

Those divided into sects has deviated so much from the Quran. You have now sunni and shia who have invented an idol, like imam Mahdi. If they only follow the Quran, they will be safe from idols or associations. It is only the word of God in there and true guidance.

I think we need to truly ponder on Islam vs. how muslims practise it, after all, the Qu'rans main topics include what Jewish and Christians did wrong. It all boils down to their cultural beliefs and whims becoming their priority over the revelations. And I see that happening with hadiths. And also it was a mistake that scholars took to much authority. Again: we have that problem in the Ummah. We should be terrified and extremely cautious as muslims to commit the same mistakes as jewish and christians, and the solution is to always get back to the Qu'ran, always refer to the Qu'ran first. I would go as far as to say, that if something remains unclear, to seek answers in the previous revelations of what could have been meant. If the Qu'ran says the Torah and Gospel and Psalms are legit in their original forms, and Allah calls its followers "the people of the book", then we have valid reason to refer to them. We do not have much of a reason to refer to hadiths though, except we could consider them as mere informations. I wouldn't go as far as to say "throw away all hadiths", but I would strictly distance myself from rules and claims in them, that are not specified in the Qu'ran. We do not live in the time of the Prophet (saw) and we cannot confirm that he ruled what hadiths claim that he ruled, if it isn't mentioned in the Qu'ran. And if I am not mistaken, hadiths are also what the Qu'ran warns us of. They are way to culture oriented and "authentic" or not, they terribly contradict.

I suppose this is a similar division to that in Christianity between Tradition & Scripture vs 'sola scriptura'

With The Name of Allah, The Possibly Temporarily Merciful: Why did The Prophet not order to compile a book of hadith like Bukhari? Why did Abu Bakar not order to compile a book of hadith like Bukhari? Why did Umar not order to compile a book of hadith like Bukhari? Why did Uthman not order to compile a book of hadith like Bukhari? Why did Ali not order to compile a book of hadith like Bukhari? If the later hadiths are actually part of Islam then why did The Prophet and his four successive caliphs burn and bann all such hadiths during their rule, for over 200 years!? This is why: [The Quran 77:50] فباى حديث بعده يومنون [Translation] Then in which hadith after it (The Quran) are they believing? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- True Submission to The Most High is very different from the popular sects. Study these Quran verses for further insight: 6:112-116, 45:6-11, 12:111.

Please make video about history of all hadith and their authenticity. Now day it is a hot topic.

I am Quranic , Hadith it’s absolutely different religion than what is in Quran! There is even ayah in Quran which forbids any to follow the what’s is written by men or what so call Hadith! Hadith means speech, or as the say what Mohamed have said ! There is ayah 5 of Surat al ghathia ( تلك آيات الله نتلوها عليك بالحق فبأي حديث بعد الله وآياته يؤمنون) this are the verses of allah , in which Hadith after it you come to believe!?

Great channel brother. Very nuanced and careful considerations.

The problem is, to even understand Quran you need hadiths. Prophet Muhammad pbuh's life comes from hadiths. The explanations to how to perform the orders Allah gives us come from hadiths. So, we would know almost nothing about Prophet's life if we rule out hadiths, which makes understanding many parts of Quran impossible. Just make this practice, take the Quran, read it, try to understand its verses, try to practice what it orders you to do and try to do it without any explanation that is based on hadiths. It says to you give zakah. How much? Make salah. How? Make Hajj. How? Cut the hands of thieves? Like any thief, no details? That's absurd. And not just the orders and practices, but like I said, if you rule out Prophet Muhammad's life, you won't understand the context of many of these verses and what they are referring to. So although it might sound attractive, in practice not accepting hadiths creates a Quran which is impossible to follow and practice. Many people learn Islam in a way that many of its parts come from hadiths, then rule hadiths out and say "Only Quran" because they don't like some parts that come with hadiths. But if you reject all the hadiths, it simply makes an Islam full of holes. So it's just going the easy way, but not actually creating anything sensible and consistent imo. And you will find that all Quranists have vastly different understanding of Islam. Some say that salah (prayer) is not even a thing and is added, yet other Quranists pray salah and consider it obligatory. Because they don't have anything to explain Quran rather than their own conclusions, every person comes up with a different practice of Islam, which is simply impossible to apply together as muslims.

I was a kid when I thought that hadith were kind of weird and contradictory to the idea of the quran. As i grew up and had a crisis in faith, i decided to read the quran in translation and came to the conclusion theres no way hadith should have the importance they are given. Started reading up about it, especially HOW they were compiled and heard of Quranist arguments against it. Its the main thing that kept me in the religion lol.

Amongst all the Muslims, I've most respect for those Quranists, as the only one's who acknowledge the absurdity of the Hadith, and at least trying to prove their Quran as a self-sufficient or complete holy book, but unfortunately, the Hadithists are correct, so far as the Quran is a defective or incomplete book, which is fully dependent on supplementation from extra-canonical sources like the Hadith, since the Quran which we've today, is a very short and disorganized book, which not only lacks any tradition of authorship, or information about its potential authors, but more importantly, it's missing the context for most of its content, and the practical guidances, which are necessary for Islam, as an organized religion.

This Quran verse is enough: "This Quran is explanation for all things.." Hadith is only secondary and historicaly source, it don't have to be true.

I thank you very much for rising this issue for Muslims non living in Islamic countries, be it from Sunni or Chiaa. Hadiths were fabricated during the time of Muawiya after the assassination of the Imam Ali, to help the new king establish his power and legacy as a king and as a khalif. Muawiya was a genius and a strategist of his time, unfortunately, none of the companions was aware of him, including the imam Ali. He chose to be away from them and lived in Damascus from where he planned his way year after year since the death of the prophet. All the Khalifs have been assassinated (Omar, Othmane, Ali, and his son Hassan) and ahlu al-hadith in Sunni world did not ask and don't let Muslims ask about these murders and investigate them. If a president is assassinated, people must know who did and who is behind it. Muslims know little or nothing. The unique beneficiary was Muawiya. When settled on the throne, he encouraged hadith fabrication because he understood that he cannot destroy Islam completely. Few historian analyzed his life before and after Islam. He belongs to bani-Ummaya, the fierce enemy of the prophet and his religion since the beginning of Islam, but were submitted to Islam only by the sword after 20 years of wars, and all became Muslims only after the death of the prophet. Muawiya succeeded in his anti-Islamic revolution by excellence. He had and used christian counselors in Damascus and trained christian solders in his conquest. He learned from them how religion can be used to reign over people and was able to build an empire. He used both Christians and Muslims for his ambition, and used many hadith to achieve his goal. The Islam that we have now in Sunni countries is MUAWIYA'S VERSION edited in the time of al Abbasid. This does not mean that Chiaa have a total truth Islam or a cleaner version. According to the Quran, all Muslims now in all these groups are mushriks. See chapter ROOM (Romans) verses 30-32: You can challenge any sheikh in any group to call for unity of Muslim and open a dialogue. He will use 1000 hadiths to present excuses that the other is the problem. It is what with a fine precision the verse 32 in chpater room describes. May Allah end this with more open minded people.

As a former non-muslim I must say that if I had learned Islam from the hadiths and not from the Quran I would be an enemy of Islam. Supanallah God introduced me to the first Quran and now I am a Muslim

To hadith zealots, can you explain this? Hadith 2:256 says no compulsion in religion but sahih bukhari 8:387 says.....Narated By Anas bin Malik : Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have

The Prophets pbuh farewell sermon. Muhammad pbuh said I leave behind me two things the Quran and The Sunnah and as long as you follow this you will never go astray.

In this comment section you'll find a lot of pious Scholars that know everything about Islam yet not a single soul has contributed anything to the Ummah. May Allah Subhana Wata'ala have mercy on our souls and may Allah bless us with the companionship of our beloved Rasool pbuh and sahabas may Allah be pleased with them All.

Nice video, please also make a video on four schools of Jurisprudence in Sunni Islam (Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali)

So, the Quranists are closer to the earliest Muslims and their practices. The 'traditionalist' approach came much later and could be referred to as a 'bida' [innovation].

I am a proud Quranist. Shall I seek other than God as a lawmaker when it is He who has brought down to you the Book fully detailed? 6:114 A Book (Quran) has been brought down to you, so let there be no constraint in your chest because of it, and so that you may warn with it. It is a Reminder for the believers. Follow what has been brought down to you from your Lord and do not follow any allies besides Him. Rarely do you remember! 7:2-3

So this is what happens when Islam goes Sola Scriptura.

Lol! I didn't know that I was a Quranist!

Living in united kingdom as a muslim I donot see any problem in practicing muslim religion and at the same time conforming to the law of land. The modern Govts like uk are capable of defending the rights of individuals from cradle to grave. The law of the land including the justice system is very complex that's why it can take care of demands of modern complex issues. So why the same justice system as in uk cannot be duplicated in a Muslim country .

About Hassan Farhan Al-Maliki, i don't think he consider himself to be a pure Quranist, but in a sense yes he consider Quran to be supreme to Ahadiths, for example, his theories about how majority of early muslims were in fact hypocrites is derived from Quran and he consider that the abondonance of stories from ahadith, but not just the ones attributed to the prophet but also from his companions (and unlike the traditionalist sunnis who consider most companions to be infallible even tho theorically they don't but they practically treat them as saints ) those stories and naration have distored the original message of the Quran, so yes in this sense he argues same as Quranists but one distinction is that he don't throw all tradition out of the window, like extreme Quranists, he accept ahadiths that follow and agree with Quran

Peace be upon you all. Hope you will deeply & sincerely reflect on below points with an open mind IA. 1) Throughout the Quran, we frequently see the reference to itself as "Al-Quran". Why then is there not a single place in the entire Quran where a secondary scripture or divine revelation called "As-Sunnah" (the Sunnah) or "Al-Hadith An-Nabawi" (the Prophetic Hadith) is likewise mentioned? Doesn't the Quran constantly claim that it is clear & straightforward? (6:116, 7:52). How then could God take the time to mention something as seemingly trivial as onions and lentils (2:61), and yet fail to clearly identify the most important source of guidance & revelation that all believers for all times are forever required to follow as religious guidance? 2) Why do the words "Hadith" and "Sunnah" nevertheless appear over and over again throughout the Quran, yet never ONCE refer to what traditional Muslims use them as? (as the inspired words & teachings of the Prophet). Not only this, but the words "Sunnah" and "Hadith" are in fact often used throughout the Quran in ways that refer to the supremacy & exclusive authority of Allah and the Quran's message itself, thus in almost a taunting manner towards what traditional Muslims would later come to believe about the "prophetic Hadith" and this idea of dual revelation' (see for example Q 77:50, 46:5,39:23 ). If there was actually a second scripture or revelation ordained by God called the 'Sunnah/Hadith', wouldn't this be extremely deceptive and misleading? 3) Why does the Quran constantly make mention of itself and it's perfect guidance, lack of contradictions, and promise of its preservation and so on, yet make NO such magnificent claims about the Sunnah if it is indeed a co-authoritative revelation of God to humanity? Wouldn't we at east expect that the Quran adds something like the phrase "'and the Sunnah" in these numerous verses where the Quran alone is uniquely mentioned as the supreme guidance & sacred revelation? 4) Why does the so-called Prophetic Sunnah (as supposedly codified in the Hadith) contradict the Quran in so many significant ways? For example, Sahih Hadiths tell is that the Prophet will be an intercessor on Judgement Day for those in his Ummah who committed MAJOR sins, whereas the Quran clearly states that anyone who commits major sins and fails to repent will be condemned to Hell, and will have no protector intercessor, or savior. How can these teachings be a "commentary" on the Quran (as virtually all sunni Muslim scholars position) when they blatantly contradict it? 5) Why do you say that the Sunnah (as supposedly preserved in the Hadith) is a commentary on the Quran, when we know that the Hadith is actually just a collection of isolated sayings and doings of the Prophet and his companions, with less than 1% actually being direct commentary on the Quran? How can one claim this especially when considering the massive disagreement amongst traditional sects and scholars when it comes to Hadith-based theology, as well as numerous clear & major contradictions between the Quran and Hadith as pointed out above? 6) Why does the Quran constantly make mention of the Torah and Gospel, as well as the Psalms and other revealed scriptures of God -and call these "guidance" and "beacons of light"--while no such honorable mention is ever made of the supposed second revelation that God allegedly sent down to the Prophet as the inspired Sunnah? How could God possibly fail to prioritize the divine identification of the Sunnah/ Hadith--which is supposedly INDISPENSABLE for understanding the Quran itself-and yet constantly make mention of the amazing wonder & authority of the previous scriptures & revelations, which we aren't even required to follow anymore? Once again, wouldn't this seem to be gravely misleading? 7) lf we got rid of the Quran and just kept all of the accepted Hadith, don't you think that the current religion of traditional Islam would still be perfectly intact? In other words, isn't the Hadith alone sufficient for nearly everything you need to practice traditional Islam in its current form? What then is the need for the Quran under this framework? What other essential use or practical value does the Quran actually provide that the Hadith cannot? In fact, isn't this why the Sunni Muslim scholars of the past were forced to admit the Quran is in more need of the Sunnah than the Sunnah is in need of the Quran"? 8) Why is there such a massive difference between the structure of the Quran (the codified words of God) and the structure of the Hadith (the alleged codified words of the Prophet) if they are both indeed co-equal legally-binding divine revelations brought down by God? For example, the Quran is preserved word-for-word, whereas the Hadith is mainly preserved meaning-to-meaning; the Quran is unique in style and incredibly easy to memorize & recite, whereas the Hadith is clearly human literature and was not made for easy memorization; the Quran has a set 'canon' that is more-or-less unanimously agreed upon and was transmitted as such, whereas the Hadith consists of thousands of disjointed unrelated reports that had to be individually collected and vigorously authenticated using human-devised methods thousands of disjointed unrelated reports that had to be individually collected and authenticated using human-devised methods of verification; and the list goes on. If both the Quran and the Sunnah were equally divine revelations of God, why is this the case? Yet isn't this EXACTLY what one would expect if people falsely attributed a human work of literature as being divine revelation alongside God's true word? 9) lf you were to hand a copy of the Quran to an unbiased stranger who spoke fluent classical Arabic, and had them read the Quran for the first time, from beginning to end, and with no other source of information would they come back to you confused and puzzled, and be asking you for the secondary scripture & co-divine revelation called the "Prophetic Sunnah & Hadith" that they were allegedly supposed to read about in the Quran? 10) The Quran mentions that the Jinn (the beings of the unseen realm; the parallel creation to us human beings) can actually hear the Quran being recited and follow it as such (Quran 72:1); thus we learn that the Quran is even a source of guidance for Jinn themselves. Therefore, is it required for the Jinn to follow the Sunnah & Hadith? If not, why not? But if so, how so? What model do you propose for such a thing to work? 11) We already know and agree that the previous generations before us who were given scripture & prophethood by Allah (SWT) went far astray and added all sorts of falsehoods and fake traditions to their religion, including the Talmud of the Jews (who also interestingly claim that it contains ancient traditions of Moses passed down as commentary on the Torah) as well as the writings of Paul & the early Church fathers, whom Christians have essentially given precedence over Jesus' own words and have thereby begun to worship the Trinity and hold other serious false beliefs, that can even lead one to eternal damnation on Judgement Day. With this (frightening) reality in mind, shouldn't we be worry that WE too might also have gone astray from the pure teachings of God in the Quran? Wouldn't be utterly foolish and careless of us to ignore the warnings of Allah (SWT) about the historical corruptions & fabrications of the people of divine Scripture before us, and thus fail to consider that we too might be deviating from the right path just as they once did?...Indeed, when Prophet Moses left his people for just 40 days to meet with God, he came back to find them committing no less than the most heinous & atrocious sin of worshipping a carved idol, even after they had seen all that God did for them in Egypt. That was 10 DAYS; what then do you think of the Prophet's followers after 1,400 years? 12) Finally, what WOULD the Quran actually have to say for you to accept that it is the only revelation brought down from God to the Prophet? The Quran already says countless times that it is clear & lucid, sufficient for guidance, detailed & self-explanatory, unmatched & supreme, and perfectly preserved--so what else could the Quran possibly say for you to realize that it is indeed what it claims to be, and that no other scriptures or revelations are mandated on us to follow? Peace!

Hadiths were written 250 years after Muhammeds death. There are 700.000 hadiths compiled. Only 6k are considered as sahih. In this 6k hadiths, a lot of them contradict each other and the Quran. Allah says in the Quran that it's easy to understand, complete and enough.

🙋‍♂️ I follow the Quran alone.

According to Quran, no Muslim should believe in any other Hadith after the Quran as a law and order of God. Al-Jasiyah 45:6 تِلْكَ ءَايَٰتُ ٱللَّهِ نَتْلُوهَا عَلَيْكَ بِٱلْحَقِّۖ فَبِأَىِّ حَدِيثٍۭ بَعْدَ ٱللَّهِ وَءَايَٰتِهِۦ يُؤْمِنُونَ These are the verses of Allah which We recite to you in truth. Then in what statement after Allah and His verses will they believe?

I become Quranist after studying the verse 89 of Chapter 16

What I find contradictory is that many Sunni Muslims say that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was just a human but at the same time he was perfect. This never made sense to me he has always been just a messanger.

Fun thing: Imam Abu Hanifa could be considered as "Quranist" in early Islam period. Abu Hanifa is known for his Qur'an knowledge and his ra'y. If we traced back some literatures came from ahl-al-Hadith scholars, we find so many negative comments towards Abu Hanifa's ra'y (e.g. Sufyan al-Thawri, Yahya ibn Ma'in, even Ahmad ibn Hanbal). And we also find his funny critics about hadiths (I recommend you to read "Tarikh Baghdad" by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi for deep information about this). And we also find a book which was written by himself called "Al-'Alim wa al-Muta'alim", in which this book contains so many masa'ils (quests) and how he solves these masa'ils based on only Qur'an. But Imam Abu Hanifa now is considered as imam of sunna. We can sort 3 reasons: 1. Because his legal decisions are not very contradictory to sunna traditions. But just to remember, his legal decisions is not because he relied on hadiths. It comes from his ra'ys and his Quranic problem solvings. 2. Imam al-Shafi'i wrote so many praises to Imam Abu Hanifa. Even though he criticized Hanifite schools, but he considered Abu Hanifa wasn't totally wrong about his legal decisions. 3. So many Abu Hanifa's pupils/disciples/followers fabricated so many riwayas claiming that Abu Hanifa's has positive attitude towards hadith and athar. One of later Hanifite scholar, Al-Shaibani, which had close relations to traditional schools during the end of Hanifite influence in ahl al-Ra'y, quoted so many fabricated Abu Hanifa's riwayas that claim Abu Hanifa has positive attitude towards hadith and athar. One of riwaya is well-known in the circle of Sunni scholars, that Abu Hanifa said: "I will not decide anything before an athar comes to me". Based on this historical fact, I considered Abu Hanifa's idea as "Proto-Quranism".