The status of the Sunnah among the Qadiyyan and the difference between them and the Quranists in this regard.

The Shaykh : And similar to this group in departing from Islam in the name of the Qur'an is another group by which Muslims have also been afflicted in our time, namely the Qadiyyan sect, who call themselves the Ahmadiyyah. In my knowledge and belief, this naming misleads people regarding the reality of this group's call. I do not wish to speak about them on this occasion except to the extent that it relates to my statement here. There is no difference between them and the first group of those who deny the authority of the Sunnah and the Prophetic hadith, except for one difference: they appear to argue using the Sunnah, unlike the first group, which openly denies this argumentation. As for the Qadiyyan, who call themselves the Ahmadiyyah, they pretend that they believe in the Sunnah and argue with it, and that it is not permissible to depart from it. However, when a researcher studies their statements, it becomes clear to him that their claim to argue with the Sunnah is like a mirage in a low-lying area, which the thirsty man perceives as water. This is because, above all, they are like the first group in that they give no weight whatsoever to the science of hadith terminology, nor to the science of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators), nor to this rich history of biographies of hadith narrators, whether they were among the authors and preservers like the compilers of the six books, or among the narrators of the hadiths in their books. All this rich science has no value or weight in their eyes, because for them, a hadith is authentic only if it agrees with the Noble Qur'an. They stated this explicitly, and specifically, Mahmud Mirza Mahmud Bashir, who is the son of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiyyani, stated explicitly that an authentic hadith is only what agrees with the Noble Qur'an. As for the science of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil and what we mentioned earlier, they do not pay attention to it. If a hadith agrees with the Qur'an, it is a proof for them; otherwise, the proof is only the Noble Qur'an. Perhaps you feel with me that this statement benefits its claimant in nothing and does not exempt him from being a copy of those Quranists. This is because a hadith agreeing with the Qur'an is a tautology, for if a hadith is in accordance with the Qur'an, it has not brought anything new. And if we leave acting upon this hadith, we have not left anything important, because it agrees with what is in the Qur'an. Thus, its existence in this state and its absence are the same. Therefore, I consider this to be a type of misleading rhetoric to which many Islamic sects usually resort. Their statement that the hadith is a proof, and their interpretation of the hadith by what agrees with the Qur'an, has no benefit. Rather, this is a form of misleading these young people whom they call to follow them. They cannot appear with the reality of their matter, which is that they rely only on the Qur'an, so they add the word "arguing with the Sunnah" to the Qur'an. They add their argumentation with the Sunnah to the Qur'an, and this is a wicked policy of theirs.