✍ Written by: Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad Zubair
— “What are your qualifications?”
— “What degrees do you hold?”
— “What is your sect?”
— “Why did you pursue Islamic studies?”
I calmly responded, “Let’s focus on the real issue. What specific concern brought you here?”
He replied bluntly:
“I don’t accept Hadith. Prove it to me.”
“Do you believe in the Qur’an?”
He affirmed:
“Yes, I do.”
I countered:
“Well, I do not believe in the Qur’an. Prove it to me.”
Startled, he responded:
“What kind of argument is that?”
I explained:
“It's a matter of methodology. The same method you’ll use to prove the Qur’an, I’ll use to prove Hadith.”
“How is the Qur’an proven in your view?”
I responded:
“In the same way Hadith is proven. I heard it from my teacher, who heard it from his teacher, and so on—back to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.”
Every student of traditional Islamic seminaries receives a chain of transmission (sanad) that connects directly to the Prophet ﷺ. Just as we learn Qur’an from a qāri’ with an unbroken sanad, we learn Hadith from a Shaykh al-Ḥadīth who links us to the Prophet ﷺ through reliable narrators.
“But the Qur’an is protected by Allah!”
I asked:
“Where is that mentioned?”
He cited a verse from the Qur’an.
I pointed out:
“You're trying to prove the Qur’an using the Qur’an itself. If I used Hadith to prove Hadith, you’d reject it as circular reasoning.”
“So what are you suggesting?”
I urged him:
“Let’s focus on something positive. Instead of attacking Hadith, why not defend the Qur’an?”
Surprised, he asked:
“What objections are there against the Qur’an?”
I replied:
“Western orientalists have raised hundreds of criticisms against the Qur’an. I have a personal archive of over 250 papers authored by professors at renowned Western universities attempting to prove (God forbid) that the Qur’an is no different from the corrupted Bible.”
“Isn’t it ironic that those who identify as ‘People of the Qur’an’ are busy echoing the very arguments of the Qur’an’s enemies, attacking Hadith, while neglecting the defense of the Book they claim to uphold?”
Rejecting Hadith while leaning on flawed Western critiques is not a defense of the Qur’an; it is an abandonment of the entire Islamic epistemology.
❖ Introduction: A Thoughtful Encounter
During a session at Qur’an Academy, through some mutual acquaintances, I was introduced to a man who denied the authority of Hadith. He immediately launched into a barrage of questions:— “What are your qualifications?”
— “What degrees do you hold?”
— “What is your sect?”
— “Why did you pursue Islamic studies?”
I calmly responded, “Let’s focus on the real issue. What specific concern brought you here?”
He replied bluntly:
“I don’t accept Hadith. Prove it to me.”
❖ Turning the Tables: A Logical Approach
I asked:“Do you believe in the Qur’an?”
He affirmed:
“Yes, I do.”
I countered:
“Well, I do not believe in the Qur’an. Prove it to me.”
Startled, he responded:
“What kind of argument is that?”
I explained:
“It's a matter of methodology. The same method you’ll use to prove the Qur’an, I’ll use to prove Hadith.”
❖ Chain of Transmission: The Common Ground
He inquired:“How is the Qur’an proven in your view?”
I responded:
“In the same way Hadith is proven. I heard it from my teacher, who heard it from his teacher, and so on—back to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.”
Every student of traditional Islamic seminaries receives a chain of transmission (sanad) that connects directly to the Prophet ﷺ. Just as we learn Qur’an from a qāri’ with an unbroken sanad, we learn Hadith from a Shaykh al-Ḥadīth who links us to the Prophet ﷺ through reliable narrators.
❖ The Argument of Divine Preservation
He interjected:“But the Qur’an is protected by Allah!”
I asked:
“Where is that mentioned?”
He cited a verse from the Qur’an.
I pointed out:
“You're trying to prove the Qur’an using the Qur’an itself. If I used Hadith to prove Hadith, you’d reject it as circular reasoning.”
❖ A Call for Constructive Engagement
He paused, and asked:“So what are you suggesting?”
I urged him:
“Let’s focus on something positive. Instead of attacking Hadith, why not defend the Qur’an?”
Surprised, he asked:
“What objections are there against the Qur’an?”
I replied:
“Western orientalists have raised hundreds of criticisms against the Qur’an. I have a personal archive of over 250 papers authored by professors at renowned Western universities attempting to prove (God forbid) that the Qur’an is no different from the corrupted Bible.”
“Isn’t it ironic that those who identify as ‘People of the Qur’an’ are busy echoing the very arguments of the Qur’an’s enemies, attacking Hadith, while neglecting the defense of the Book they claim to uphold?”
❖ Conclusion: A Wake-Up Call
This thought-provoking conversation underscores the need for sincere seekers of truth to engage in defense of divine revelation as a whole—Qur’an and Sunnah alike—rather than picking selective battles based on orientalist frameworks.Rejecting Hadith while leaning on flawed Western critiques is not a defense of the Qur’an; it is an abandonment of the entire Islamic epistemology.
