A long time ago debating with a Hadith follower, I took the Maliki stance about Hadiths explained by Hamza Yusuf.
This was my answer to the Hadith follower.
"For all those who say I reject Hadith. Yes I Reject the Hadith. I do not reject Sunnah. And here's why:
Hadees and Sunnah are actually completely 2 different things and are not the same.
What most people today believe is that Hadees is Sunnah, which is wrong.
Sunnah is from the Tawatur action of the Ummat-e-Muslima passed through from generation from generation.
Sunnah is Not Hadees.
Sunnah is Tawatur action of the Ummat-e-Muslimah.
Hadees were written 200 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and it mostly had Zoroastrian/Persian influences.
Same goes for Fiqh. Fiqh was the invention of the Malookiyah of the Abbasids.
It is also explained by Maliki scholars who used to reject Hadiths when the Hadiths used to contradict the Practice of Muslims in Madinah."
It is also explained Hamza Yusuf Al Maliki Maliki. Here is the source for you.
Although this video is 1:29:01 long but only listen to this from 1:00 to 3:20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dniDWSQqGRQBut still for anyone doesn't bother to listen, here it is in written form for you all:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Basis of the religion is obviously revelation so, the Prophet (SAW) had a revelation which wasn't just The Quran because He said: Uteetul Quran wa Musluhu (I was given the Quran and I was given the Lights of the Quran) which is the Sunnah.
Generally the ulema used Sunnah and Hadith to be synonymous, but the Malikis actually differentiate between Sunnah and Hadith. They (Malikis) DON'T CONSIDER Hadith, Sunnah.
The Sunnah is specifically, a practice and some of the practice was transmitted through practice.
IT WASN'T TRANSMITTED THROUGH Hadith.
So Imam Malik, THE PRACTICE of the People of Madinah, HE CONSIDERED IT TO BE SUNNAH. Even though there WASN't a Hadith necessarily relating it.
I give you an example, theres a hadith in which The Prophet (SAW) prohibited fasting on Friday, but Imam Malik found the people in Madinah, the Ulema of Madinah fasting on Friday.
So He (Imam Malik) said "I'm not gonna take one hadith and isolate the and leave the actions of the Ulema of this city. They (Ulema of Madinah and People of Madinah) were doing this in front of the Sahaba and they (Ulema of Madinah and People in Madinah) took it from the Sahaba and the Sahaba didn't say "Oh! The Prophet said don't fast".
So if there was a solitary Hadith and it there weren't a lot pf people related it, Imam Malik just did not consider because the Hadith – Theres a vast number of Hadith and many of the Hadith are not - THEY HAVE NO APPLICATION, AT ALL. And theres a lot of fabricated hadith.
The potential for Ahadith to enter into the corpus EVEN IF IT HAS A SOUND MATN, its still not real but its there. The probability is there and its actually a reasonable probability. It's not a outrageous probability.
So that's why theres a great rigger in how the Fuqaha look at the Hadith. The Fuqaha have a completely different attitude towards the Hadith that the Muhadtisun have. And Abu Hanifah (May Allah be Pleased with him) is a good example of that where he rejected many many absolutely verified sound Hadith because they went against certain principles."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And Why did Hamza Yusuf said "THEY HAVE NO APPLICATION, AT ALL", it's because Hadiths are:
1. Contradictory (They contradict each other)
2. Uncertain (We will never know if any narration is either true or false)
3. Useless (Even IF any hadith is TRUE, majority of them just cannot be practiced, because majority of the hadiths contain useless information which is no help to us or does not have any practical application for us in real practical lives)
4. Diversion (These books divert us from the divine prophetic mission mentioned in the Quran and instead, hadith books indulge us into uncertain and impractical debates which are going to produce no results. Practically or even spiritually)
In conclusion: Hadith books are just too much useless historical information, and even if the narration is true, majority of them are just too much useless and impractical, producing no results, either apparent or even spiritually. Jews left the Torah and focused on the uncertain, useless and impractical information from Talmud. Christians left the Injeel and focused on uncertain, useless and impractical information in Canon Laws, reformed theology, cathecatisms, doctrines of John Wesley.
And just like Jews and Christians, Muslims have started focusing on the uncertain, useless and impractical information mentioned in hadiths and fiqh books.
One cannot build a foundation and debate on something when you are already uncertain about it. And because of it, the foundation of Islam would be shaky."
This was my debate with a Hadith follower
And God knows the Best
