Why is Quran any more Authentic than Hadithes?

[InvestigateTruth]

Scientifically and logically speaking, why Quran verses are any more authentic than the Hadithes?
I mean, why would a particular verse of Quran be considered perfectly authentic, but a Hadith of the Prophet, generally considered less authentic than the Quran? What proofs are there that a verse is certainly exactly what Muhammad said, but any hadith is usually seen doubtful, and even some consider they should not even use hadithes.



Note: I understand that Muslims believe Quran is direct word of God, and Allah protected it, and I also share this belief as a Bahai, but, in fact, it was Muhammad who said these verses, so, beside our belief that God revealed it to Muhammad, I am looking for scientific and logical reasons why Quran verses should be considered more authentic than hadithes?

 

[Augustus]

I am looking for scientific and logical reasons why Quran verses should be considered more authentic than hadithes?

As a general rule regarding all historical texts: all things being equal then an earlier source is better than a late source.

 

[Link]

Every verse is a proof and integral part of Quran. Until you really become familiar with Quran, some verses will appear trivial. It's when they all hold each other and interpret each other, that you see the wonders of Quran unfold. And when that happens, you know, every verse is a integral part of Quran.

This is why mistranslations of one verse can off-set the interpretation of all of Quran.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

As a general rule regarding all historical texts: all things being equal then an earlier source is better than a late source.

Ok, The Quran was written down within 20 years after the passing of Muhammad. So, still it was not written down while Muhammad had not departed, thus Muhammad was not there to check the first compilation of Quran to confirm its authenticity and accuracy.
As regards to the Hadithes though, many of them have chains of narrators, so, in many cases, a hadith is repetitively confirmed by several narrators.

 

[Link]

Hadiths - some of them are so eloquent and superior words then normal humans, as they are uttered words calculated by chosen humans by God, but at the end, even a long beautiful prayer, you can know it's from them but you can't know every little part of it is. It's open to for example, a slip of a false statement. The same is true of Saheefa Sajjadiya, you can know most of it is from Imam As-Sajjad, you can't know every single part of it is.

The way to investigate hadiths to use them as ways to test your knowledge to Quran or make you reflect over Quran. The Prophet and the 12 Successors and Fatima calculated their words to compliment the Quran.

They don't assert things that can't be proven. But hadiths also need to be studied holistically and not isolated.

At the end, the Imams left enough light to the Quran, that even there is a lot of falsehood attributed to them, you can dispel that falsehood through help of the truth they manifest and light provided and reasoning and proofs they provided and with the help of Quran, this is not a hard task.

 

[Link]

Ok, The Quran was written down within 20 years after the passing of Muhammad. So, still it was not written down while Muhammad had not departed, thus Muhammad was not there to check the first compilation of Quran to confirm its authenticity and accuracy.
As regards to the Hadithes though, many of them have chains of narrators, so, in many cases, a hadith is repetitively confirmed by several narrators.

Mutuwatur is subjective, every scholar had their own definition of it. Some scholars said many weak reports with different chains can prove tuwatur. Others said only authentic chains of a certain amount can.

So at the end, it's subjective, ilmel rijaal.

 

[Link]

As a general rule regarding all historical texts: all things being equal then an earlier source is better than a late source.

This is not true per Quran as it verifies more of the infancy gospels than the "earlier" ones.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Every verse is a proof and integral part of Quran. Until you really become familiar with Quran, some verses will appear trivial. It's when they all hold each other and interpret each other, that you see the wonders of Quran unfold. And when that happens, you know, every verse is a integral part of Quran.

This is why mistranslations of one verse can off-set the interpretation of all of Quran.

I agree with you. I also see divinity of the Quran from its verses. But this is your own perception, and my own perception. Just because you see based on your own perception a wisdom in Quran, is not a proof that can be accepted scientifically. Howcome atheists, Christian's do not see such a wisdom?
Historical methods of verifying authenticity of a text can be considered scientifically.

 

[firedragon]

Scientifically and logically speaking, why Quran verses are any more authentic than the Hadithes?
I mean, why would a particular verse of Quran be considered perfectly authentic, but a Hadith of the Prophet, generally considered less authentic than the Quran? What proofs are there that a verse is certainly exactly what Muhammad said, but any hadith is usually seen doubtful, and even some consider they should not even use hadithes.



Note: I understand that Muslims believe Quran is direct word of God, and Allah protected it, and I also share this belief as a Bahai, but, in fact, it was Muhammad who said these verses, so, beside our belief that God revealed it to Muhammad, I am looking for scientific and logical reasons why Quran verses should be considered more authentic than hadithes?

Brother. There are many ways to look at your question. There is the Ulum al hadith which is a generic word for all kinds of sciences in the study of ahadith. Your question does not make sense in some ways because according to the ahadith system of Ilm al Rijaal the Quran itself is ranked the most mutawatir single hadith in existence. Thats according to the science of hadith. So i hope you understand that in the school of hadith, Quran is the most mutawatir hadith.

Do you understand whats being said brother? Mutawatir means mass narrated and its so mass narrated that its difficult to have errors. So lets say 20 people narrate something the same way, it will very rarely contain errors. Well, thats one way of authenticating ahadith and Quran in this hadith science the Quran is deemed the most authentic.

Thus, according to "Hadith", Quran is by definition, and by outcome, the most authentic.

THATS NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE BELIEF THAT QURAN IS GODS WORD. And this is without taking into any manuscripts, dating, etc etc into the picture. This is purely based on the seince of hadith.

Then there is a science called science. According to scientific dating, carbon 14 dating, the Quran far outdates any hadith manuscript by miles and miles. Its actually impossible to even make a comparison.

Ill give you an example.

• Muhammed lived in the early 7th century.
• Imam Malik lived in the 8th century (earliest hadith narrating Jurist). 100 - 150 years later.
• Imam Bukhari lived in the 9th century (most prominent hadith collector) - 200 plus years later
• Al aasili's manuscript - 400 years later.

No comparison.

Imam Malik said very famously.

Ihmaalul wakaboolul hadithi.

That means "Reject and accept hadith". Thats why there is a science they developed to do just that. Some Muslims do have this notion that hadith are all authentic but thats not what the scholars who narrated the ahadith had in their mind.

Well, must stop there.

 

[Link]

I agree with you. I also see divinity of the Quran from its verses. But this is your own perception, and my own perception. Just because you see based on your own perception a wisdom in Quran, is not a proof that can be accepted scientifically. Howcome atheists, Christian's do not see such a wisdom?
Historical methods of verifying authenticity of a text can be considered scientifically.

What I stated will give you certainty. Human methods of verifying information has never worked and will never work. The only way to religion is to gain insights from God, and hadiths and Quran go together for that reason.

 

[Augustus]

Ok, The Quran was written down within 20 years after the passing of Muhammad. So, still it was not written down while Muhammad had not departed, thus Muhammad was not there to check the first compilation of Quran to confirm its authenticity and accuracy.
As regards to the Hadithes though, many of them have chains of narrators, so, in many cases, a hadith is repetitively confirmed by several narrators.

A later source is a later source, even if it claims to be based on earlier sources. To some extent, the isnad has to be taken on faith.