How can the authenticity of the Prophetic hadiths be proven and how can one refute those who claim that they are not a revelation from God, that they contradict the Qur'an, and that they were written for political purposes long after the Prophet's death?

The claims of those who cast doubt on the Sunnah are mere accusations without evidence, echoing the suspicions of Orientalists aiming to influence the Muslim masses.

Firstly: The authentic Prophetic Sunnah is a revelation from Allah, and whoever believes in the Quran believes in it. The Quran was revealed for the Prophet (peace be upon him) to explain it through word and deed, and this explanation is a revelation from Allah. Allah says: ﴿Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed.﴾ [An-Najm/3-4]. Had the Sunnah not been preserved, the methods of worship and the rulings on transactions would have been lost. Denying the preservation of this explanation is a denial of Allah’s saying: ﴿Indeed, it is We who sent down the message [i.e., the Qur’ān], and indeed, We will be its guardian.﴾ [Al-Hijr/9], and His saying: ﴿This day I have perfected for you your religion.﴾ [Al-Ma'idah/3].

Secondly: The existence of narrations in the Sunnah not mentioned in the Quran does not invalidate the Sunnah, as there is no evidence from the Quran or reason that every word or action of the Prophet must be mentioned verbatim in the Quran. Allah's command to obey the Messenger means that what the Messenger explained, even if not explicitly stated in the Quran, is part of the religion. Allah says: ﴿Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah.﴾ [An-Nisa/80]. If everything the Prophet explained had to be in the Quran, it would be difficult for people to recite and memorize it.

Thirdly: The claim that the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs fabricated hadiths is a contradiction and ignorance. How can an anonymous report from enemies of Islam be accepted, while an authentic, widely transmitted hadith with a sound chain of narration is rejected? The movement of collecting hadith was due to the efforts of the Muslim Ummah, far from the courts of rulers, and most narrators were ascetics and devout. Even if we assume intervention by caliphs, it would only be in a few hadiths related to their rule, not in hadiths concerning worship and transactions.

Fourthly: Documentation and writing of the Sunnah: The delay in documentation does not concern works left for the general public; rather, the hadith scholars used to write down what they heard. Some Companions also wrote hadith, and those who did not write did so not out of neglect but due to their intense diligence in memorization, believing that memorization was better for strengthening memory and not relying on writing. Rejecting narrations from trustworthy individuals contradicts the Quran, which commanded verifying the report of a transgressor; how then about the report of a trustworthy person? Hadith scholars began investigating and verifying from the era of the Companions and established precise conditions for accepting hadith.

Fifthly: Attacking the Sunnah is the path of the disbelievers and the misguided. The doubter's belief that caliphs intervened in fabricating hadiths implicitly acknowledges that relying on the Sunnah was the path of the Muslim Ummah, which Muslims have unanimously agreed upon throughout the ages. The denial of the Sunnah today was initiated only by Orientalists and people of disbelief and innovation from the Khawarij and Zindiqs. Following this path is following other than the path of the believers, which Allah warned against, saying: ﴿And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers – We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell; and evil it is as a destination.﴾ [An-Nisa/115].