A conversation between a Traditionalist and a Quranist.

I had a (written) communication with someone about the view of the Quranists. He was leaning for Prophetic Traditions (Ah-Hadith) I was for the Qurahinst. I believe some interesting points have been made at the conversion, so I am posting here for future reference if needed to repeat it in future.

"Are your arguments or a Quranist's arguments sprout from the idea that Hadith have not been preserved?"

I don't represent any Quranist cults so I can only tell you about my own reasoning based on my own research on the Quran(I know the Quran can guide one and at the same time misguide, but if I am to be misguided by the Quran, what on earth could have possible guided me?). I however have seen enough materials to have a solid idea about what the Quranist's belief system is and I only agree with them after self research on a case by case basis. So to answer your question, No my primary arguments didn't sprout from any concern in the collection process of the Haridths. I always considered that Allah has preserved the remembrance (the whole package) so Hadiths included in that. However, I did my share of research on the science of compilation of the Hadiths. My current view on it is, it's a self proclaimed science that has no foundation, never been accepted as a science in general scientific community and never been used by anyone in the world in any other work ever other than a specific project (I know the ayats of the Quran has a chain of narrations too, unnecessarily). That doesn't mean I reject hadiths though. I take hadiths, as hadiths, historical stories. And I value it with the same value Rasulallah told (in a hadith :P) us to apply to the taeles from the Israelite, believe it if it supplements the Quran. You might object that that's just one man's opinion against a generation of scholars, but as far as I'm concerned, Allah taught us numbers have nothing to do when it comes to the deen. In fact, most of the examples provided by the Quran shows the majority was/is/will always be in the favor of the false.

Anyway, this maybe a good place to address another comment of yours - 

"Also, the people who preserved the Quran are same who preserved the hadith, then how can they accept one and reject other? I am not starting a debate, but just saying."

Is it really a valid statement? Absolutely not. If I can use computer terminology, Quran was installed on earth by the first generation Arabs using the first ever block chain technology in the lifetime of Rasulallah. And to give a plain and simplified idea about the technology, it’s a horizontal spread of data that can provide the feature of immutability. On the other hand, the compilation of Ah-hadith was done after a long vertical spread by a handful of Persian compilers from the fourth generation using a game of chinese wispeare. I know you can hang on to the science of authenticating the chains but that will only dig your hole deeper I promise. And if you still insist that they are propagated through the same mode and media, then please show me a couple of Sahih ayats or Mouduh ayats or Dhaif ayats or Maqlub ayats from the Quran.

I want to dwell on this subject a little more because personally I believe this exposes one of the root causes that keeps one from accepting Quran only and cutting off his allegiance to the so called Sunnah of Rasulallah. Say if you were walking down the street and you found the Quran in a bookstore and without any previous context you read it, Would you believe it's the words of the creator? I am guessing most wouldn’t but if you happened to be one of the very lucky few, would it matter to you what medium the word of the Creator reached to you? See this is exactly what happened to the first groups of submitters. Their Iman was in Allah's words first. And this still happens to some of the converts too. Now as for us, our elders told us these are the words of Allah. And so we believed without even properly knowing what those words were. However our elders also told us there are words too. And so we believe them too. So, in reality we did not submit to the words of Allah. We submitted to the words of our elders. So now comes someone saying half of our elders' words are actually false creates a paradox in our brain. The question arises how can our elders be half true. If our elders were wrong about the hadiths then they could possibly be wrong about the Quran too. Therefore to keep the Quran true, without any doubt we must keep the hadiths true as well.

And as for your inquiry on - "Anyhow, lastly, I would say it would be great if you could list down the prime arguments against traditionalist. In one line, "Reasons why I do not accept the hadith".

Because the belief system provided by the Ah-Hadith clashes directly with the Quran. And I don't mean it contradicts here and there, it clearly goes 180 degrees. So you see, regardless of the validity of the preservation process of Hadits, I reject them because of their content. I know you asked for a one liner but I can’t help but give you at least one radical and hard to swallow example-

Traditionally growing up, we learnt that Rasullah will make a Shafayat on the Day of the judgment for the whole Umma. And for that any Muslim who sincirely atleast once said the Kalima will be eventually be taken out of Hell. I believe you will agree there are multiple Sahih hadiths that support this. And not to believe in this is like not to believe in Rasulallah and his deen. But throughout the Quran, Allah repeatedly directly rejected any kind of Safayat from anyone on the Day of the judgment FULL STOP. You might be thinking about Ayatul Kursi right now but just hold your horses for a moment please. With in the Sura Bakara you will find Allah repeating it three times -

“[2:48] Beware of the day when no soul can avail another soul, no intercession will be accepted, no ransom can be paid, nor can anyone be helped.

[2:123] Beware of the day when no soul will help another soul, no ransom will be accepted, no intercession will be useful, and no one will be helped.

[2:254] O you who believe, you shall give to charity from the provisions we have given to you, before a day comes where there is no trade, no nepotism, and no intercession. The disbelievers are the unjust.”

Now let's talk about Alaytul Kursi that is ironically usually shown to support the concept of Safayat. I said ironically because in reality, just after stating that there is no Safayat on the Day of the Judgment in ayat 2:254, in Ayatul Kursi (2:255) Allah explains why the idea of Safayat is ridiculous.

2:255 - “Allāh - there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Self-Sustaining. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what will be after them, and they encompass not a thing of His knowledge except for what He wills. His Kursī extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great.”

Now the traditionalist will take the 4th line and tell you see, it says without his permission. Which means he will permit some to intercede on Judgment day. Really? Just right after stating on the  previous line about no intersession from anyone whatsoever, Allah changes his mind? And then changes back his mind again throughout the rest of the Quran stating no intersession on the Judgment Day? Or is Allah saying - Who is that who can intercede with Him when he doesn't permitted any. And even if person A tries to intercede for person B, what could he possibly infom Allah about person B when Allah already knows what’s before and after of both of them! Has there something happened when Allah was sleeping or drowsing? Even whatever person A learnt person B is because Allah willed it! This kind of illogical thinking can only happen when someone doesn't quite understand how massive Allah’s is. You want to know how massive Allah is? "His Kursī extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great".

Anyway, one can still say that's your opinion but the thousands of scholars held a different opinion for thousands of years. Who cares about thousands of scholars when Allah said -
[2:48] Beware of the day when no soul can avail another soul, no intercession will be accepted, no ransom can be paid, nor can anyone be helped.

Anyway, to the second point, getting out of Hell even when Allah said Kholedina fi ha a million times(metaphorically speaking). One can say wait a minute, that's for the Kuffors exclusively. Muslims can eventually come out of it. Then I will say Allah said

[2:80] And they say, "Never will the Fire touch us, except for [a few] numbered days." Say, "Have you taken a covenant with Allāh? For Allāh will never break His covenant. Or do you say about Allāh that which you do not know?"

Someone can still say wait another minute, Allah is talking about the Jews here. I would say, fine, show me the Muslim’s covenant then with Allah’s signature on it. Allah didn’t say anything in the Quran that we don’t take heed from.

[3:24] This is because they said, "The hellfire will not touch us, except for a few days." They were thus deceived in their religion by their own fabrications.