Extended Abstract

Introduction

When it comes to analyzing an idea, adopting a historical approach is inevitable. Despite its relatively short history, the study of ideas has achieved considerable success in historical studies and, especially in recent decades, has garnered significant attention in academic circles. One of the crucial factors in such interest lies in the global conditions of thought and study (Gramī, 2017: 9).
Although an idea has a close relationship with thought, not every thought qualifies as an image. In fact, an image is the received thought that an individual or individuals have about a subject, such that this reception becomes a recognized term with independent significance. In this regard, two essential characteristics of an image are noteworthy: First, an image is a type of thought that transcends the individual level and attains a collective identity. Second, it is the product of a historical process (Ibid). Thus, these two significant features must be considered when analyzing an image.
Every image can itself be the result of a more extensive image while simultaneously leading to the creation of other images. For instance, the "image of Quran sufficiency" as a larger image has fostered a set of images, such as the asymmetry between the Quran and tradition, the sufficiency of the Quran in legislation, the intermixing of sound and weak traditions, and the impossibility of distinguishing them from one another, among others.
One of the most critical issues ensuring the credibility and validity of hadith as the second source of Islamic legislation after the Holy Quran is the historical examination of the transformation of hadith and its compilation, from its initial issuance to the stage of writing in hadith sources. Some of the challenges regarding the credibility and authority of hadith can be uncovered through a historical review. A historical perspective helps create a realistic understanding of hadith. In this context, the issue of hadith compilation and determining the time frame for the official initiation of hadith writing holds great importance. Whether or not hadith was compiled during the life of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), due to conflicting reports regarding the permission and prohibition of writing, has led hadith scholars to refrain from making definitive judgments on this matter. For example, Shi‘a hadith scholars generally rely on narratives supporting permission, while Sunni hadith scholars tend to accept both narratives of prohibition and permission and aim to resolve the contradictions between them (See: Husaynī Jalālī, 2009: 305-332). However, historical reports after the passing of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) agree that the official policy of the caliphs, at least during the first century AH, was to prevent the official compilation of hadith. Although some Orientalists have suggested extending this period by one or two additional centuries (See: Motzki, 2011:38).
The movement known as "Quraniyoon", whose main origin lies within the Sunni tradition, has emphasized reports highlighting the century-long delay in the official compilation of hadith until the beginning of the second century AH. Their primary argument against the necessity of tradition focuses on the delay in the documentation of hadith and the opposition of the companions to writing hadith. Based on this, they have facilitated the development and expansion of certain images. Analyzing these images and the interpretations formulated by the Quraniyoon regarding this challenge and addressing them is an unavoidable necessity to establish the authority of tradition.
Research Question(s)
What conclusions have the Quraniyoon drawn from the issue of the delay in hadith compilation?
 To what extent do historical and hadith-related evidence substantiate their claims?

Literature Review

Numerous systematic studies have been conducted on the history of Hadith compilation and the timeline of documenting narrations. Examination of the process of writing and recording Hadith has been a central topic in many books on Hadith history. Some scholars have independently explored this subject, such as:
- *“Tadwin Al-Sunnah Al-Sharifah”* by Sayyid Muhammad Reza Hosseini Jalali,
- *“Man‘ Tadwin Al-Hadith: Asbab wa Nataij”* by Ali Shirazani, and
- *“Tadwin Al-Hadith”* by Ibrahim Al-Fawzi.
Additionally, research has been conducted on the Qur'anists (*Quraniyyun*) and critiques of their perspectives. One of the earliest comprehensive studies in this area is the book *“Al-Quraniyyun wa Shubahatihum Hawl Al-Sunnah”* by Khadim Hussain Alahi Bakhsh, which thoroughly examines the Qur'anists and addresses their objections. Moreover, other scholarly articles have focused on the Qur'anists and their views, such as:
- *“Quran-Sufficiency and the Denial of Hadith Authority”* (Aghaei, 2010: 91-112), and
- *“Analysis and Critique of the Quraniyyun’s Hadith and Quranic Views Among Sunni Scholars”* (Nasih et al., 2014: 154-179).
Although previous studies have broadly addressed the Qur'anists’ objection regarding the delay in Hadith compilation, this research stands out by offering a critique of the Qur'anists' approach through a method of *conceptual framework analysis*, which has not been addressed elsewhere.

Methodology

This study has been conducted through a library-based research approach and is organized qualitatively using the method of description and content analysis. To achieve this, the ideas and assumptions of prominent Qur'anists, which are based on the delay in Hadith compilation, were first identified through their works and studies. These assumptions were then critically examined and questioned using historical and rational evidence.

Conclusion
There is abundant evidence and numerous indications showing that the authority of the Sunnah is not contingent upon its documentation and recording.
A review of the history of Hadith compilation reveals that the Sunnah was documented during the Prophet's lifetime. Consequently, the narrations prohibiting the writing of Hadith lack sufficient reliability, and it cannot be concluded based on such narrations that the Sunnah was considered outside of the Shari'ah by the Prophet (peace be upon him).
The opposition of the Companions to the documentation of Hadith was not universal. Some of them documented Hadith, while others, out of caution and to prevent the uncontrolled expansion of narrations, were not in favor of transmitting and documenting Hadith.
Furthermore, opposition to writing Hadith is analyzed as a policy implemented after the Prophet's era, under the caliphs' direction to prohibit Hadith documentation, rather than as a continuation of the practical tradition of the Prophet's time.

In conclusion, the primary reason and evidence cited by the Qur'anists in opposing the Sunnah—the issue of the delay in Hadith compilation—lacks necessary robustness and cannot serve as a basis for their anti-Sunnah stance.