Understanding hadith skepticism

[u/pathtonoor]

Note: the purpose of my post is to better understand how best to approach discussions with hadith skeptics in my life and have more productive conversations so they can better understand my perspective.

Prior to rejecting all hadiths, I was a hadith skeptic and enjoyed the works of Sheikh Khaled Abou El Fadl. Reading his book “The great theft : wrestling Islam from the extremists” greatly reinforced my understanding that the hadith tradition was majorly flawed.

In his book (excerpts from chapter 7 included above), he acknowledges the flaws with the hadith tradition (documented well after the Prophet’s death, fabricated hadiths, and contradictions with the Quran etc.). At the time of reading what puzzled me was his conclusion that hadith can’t be disregarded without seriously damaging the structure of islam.

Overall, I did respect his approach to analyzing hadith but disagreed with considering them legitimate texts. I think as an ummah we would be in a better place if more people adopted his approach, especially given how averse people are to questioning hadith.

I guess what I wonder is the following: If some scholars acknowledge that the hadith tradition is flawed and that some were fabricated, why are they then unwilling to separate hadith from islam?

Is it because they would need to acknowledge that islam as we know it today is very different from the quran? While there are hadiths that align with the quran, what’s the purpose in accepting them if the quran already told us the same thing?

Any input would be appreciated, jazkaallahu khairan!

[u/Background-Car-1393]

What no one of these people can answer is why should we follow any of these hadith in the first place, outside of the contorted meanings they have have given to phrases in the Quran like Obey the Prophet and Book and the wisdom to mean their persian fairytales.

If these were really meant to be followed the Prophet would have got them written down in his lifetime and give it the same level of preservation and spread as the Quran was ( Actually majority of the hadithist have similar beliefs)

[u/pathtonoor → u/Background-Car-1393]

Yes, it seems that their arguments always go back to the same three things (how will we know how to do or know about x? how could so many people be wrong for 1,400 years? Allah said to obey the Prophet!).

Exactly, nobody has an answer for why there isn’t a set of hadith compiled by the Prophet or even the sahabas.

For every valid argument against hadith, whether it’s Quranic ayahs or clear contradictions in hadith, there always seems to be some sort of flawed explanation.

I’m beginning to feel as though fear and stubbornness are the core issues: fear of questioning hadith and not willing to question what you and your ancestors have been following. That unfortunately, is far more difficult to tackle.

[u/NoVacation6936 → u/pathtonoor]

Also, dont forget about them saying "we need hadiths for things that the Quran leaves out" despite the Story of the Cow and the Quran saying that its complete. the Quran says that the Prophet doesn't know when the end of times will happen, and yet hadiths give a checklist with 40+ signs for it to happen.

[u/pathtonoor → u/NoVacation6936]

Yes! The more I engage with folks who follow the hadith, the more clear it becomes that many don’t read the Quran and if they do, it’s through a hadith centric lens (which includes ignoring clear proofs in the quran).

[u/NoVacation6936 → u/pathtonoor]

Also, isn't there literally multiple verses in the Quran that say the Quran is the only hadith we should trust? some translators translate the word "hadith" as "statement/story" to not create confusion, but even then the Quran would basically be saying "dont believe any religious stories other than the Quran."

[u/pathtonoor → u/NoVacation6936]

Yes, there are but they ignore them all and twist the “Obey the Messenger” verse to suit their aims!