The claim of the Quraniyun

The Quraniyun argue that hadith were written so long after the events that it is impossible to vouch for their authenticity. For example Ghulam Aḥmad Parvez states in his book Maqām-e–hadith:  “there were no previous records that they [authors of the kutub siṭ̣ṭah] could have borrowed the material for their collections…how can anyone vouch for these kind of ahadith based on hearsay…not a single word could be guaranteed that it belonged to the Messenger.”

Thus, according to the Quraniyun, the existence of written records at the time (or close to the time of) the incident is key to proving that the incident actually occurred. This belief, that h̩adīth were transmitted orally for 200 years and then written down is common even amongst Muslims.

Reply to this misconception

Writing something doesnt guarantee its authenticity

Shaikh Mubarakpuri cogently states that:

the mere fact that something has been written does not provide sufficient proof for its being authentic. The basic foundation for trust is the reliability of the person through whom a report is delivered to others, no matter [whether] it is in written form or not.

In other words, a written document is not proof in itself, for the author may have either been a liar, a person with a weak memory, a person prone to scribal errors. On the other hand, an oral report from a trustworthy individual, with a good memory is widely accepted, even in a court of law.

Early written records of hadith did exist

In addition, his statement: “…there were no previous records that they [authors of the kutub siṭ̣ṭah] could have borrowed the material for their collections” is incorrect. To cite one example, Bukhārī made use of ‘Abd al-Razzāq’s book entitled Muṣannaf. Abd al-Razzāq compiled his Muṣannaf based upon written as well as oral material. His written sources include Ibn ‘Uyayna’s Kitāb al-Jawāmi’ f’ī l-sunan wa-l-abwāb. Ibn ‘Uyayna was the most accurate of Zuhrī’s students and was known for writing down the hadith that he heard from his teachers. Zuhrī in turn was able to access documents written in the time of the Prophet from the sons and grandsons of the Companions. He also narrated directly from companions such as Anas ibn Mālik who wrote down hadith from the Prophet. 

The purpose of the above firstly refutes the statement that Bukhārī and his contemporaries had no written records to base their works on, and secondly it shows that a continuous written transmission of ahadith from Bukhārī all the way back to the Prophet existed.

The example above shows Bukhārī — Abd al-Razzāq— Ibn ‘Uyayna— Zuhrī— Anas ibn Mālik, where “—” shows transmission of written material.

For further information rebutting doubts about hadith, see The Quraniyoon of the twentieth century.