The various misdirections of the Hadith literature

The often asked question; Do Quranists reject all Hadiths or do they believe in some and reject some? or something to that effect. First of all, since Quranism is not a sect or a homogeneous group, there is no one answer. The way I see it is that It’s not a question of rejection or acceptance but verification. Most of us including most Quranists are not against any instructions left for us by Prophet Mohammad Pbuh. Since the Prophet Pbuh followed the Quran to the letter that is why we should not settle for anything less than those Hadith that fulfill the Quranic standard of claims, that would be four upright witnesses from their respective communities at each rung of the Isnad chain. Anything short of that will force us to believe scholars and that is where all the problems start. Blind belief in "scholars" force you to break the exclusivity of belief reserved for God alone.

Since we can make perfect sense of the 28 Surahs that Bukhari "explains" with these words "No Hadith were mentioned here" I am sure we will manage with the rest as well :)

Here is the complete list of Surah Bukhari washed his hands off, ya some explanation; 23, 27, 29, 35, 51, 57, 58, 64, 67, 69, 70, 73, 76, 81, 82, 86, 88, 89, 90, 94, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, and 109

On the other hand, if we use our God-given faculties of logic and reason there should be no problem to understand these or any Surah of the Quran because God has declared in Quran 11:1 and 75:19 that the explanation of the Quran is with God. All man has to do is gain knowledge, use reason and logic and try and understand the Quran sincerely and God will guarantee the explanation from within the Quran.

99.9% of Muslim's and Bukhari's compilation is Ahad narration, to begin with hence carry zero value as per the standard set forth in the Quran, needless to say, irrelevant from a Deen perspective. On closer examination, it seems this sophistry, patently mislabeled as "Science of Hadith", has been carefully constructed in order to protect a handful of reports that legitimize key instruments of subjugation. They range from the legitimacy of corrupt rulers to actual punishments designed to control the Ummah with.

The only way to actually declare a report "authentic" would be to have at least four witnesses at each and every rung of the chain as they divide into four distinct elements on each node. That is not all; we will also need a sufficient number of witnesses to be deemed as a fair representation of the respective communities to vouch for each witness as opposed to the unverifiable biographies as per the "science of Hadith". After all that we can be confident but never certain because of Quran 9:101. God in a way shut the door on certain or absolute knowledge other than the Quran by taking away the option from everybody, including from the Prophet of God, of telling apart the hypocrites from the true companions, effectively making every single Hadith potentially dead wrong.

As to the argument; since same sources gave us Quran and Hadith hence rejecting Hadith means rejecting Quran is the mother of all straw man. 

Even if we were to ignore the issues of verbatim transmission, Quran yes, Hadith no and the obvious contradiction in Hadith literature and none in the Quran, if now, one were to assume that the plan was to use the same people to preserve the Quran and Hadith then why didn't the Prophet Pbuh use Abu Hurairah or Anas ibn Malik or Abdullah ibn Umar or his wife Aisha to write down the Quran ? After all more than half of Bukhari's compilation consists of these four. 

You are welcome to read all the five reasons for this fallacy herehttp://lifecheat.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-we-must-never-equate-hadith-with.html