First few lines minimally edited by Shabbir for clarity.
No embarrassment please. I am sorry to have posted a link that was not right.
Ignoring what Dr Israr said in the first video, in this video of Dr Israr (and all Hadith believers) thesis is simple: They erroneously maintain that "Obey Allah AND obey the Messenger" means obey Allah by following the Qur'an and Obey the Messenger by following ahadith because the blessed Messenger is the best person to teach us how to follow the Quran.
Although this point has been dealt with by many people lot more knowledgeable than myself on this forum , a couple of issues emerge:
1. If we keep in our mind the fact that these verses were revealed 1400 years ago to a group of people who had their doubts about Islam or were not sure how to respond to blessed Messenger's role and call. They were being told in clear terms what the role of the Messener was and as Allah's sole representative and that he had to be obeyed as head of the community. They were asked to listen to him as someone who was conveying Allah's Message to them and not to turn away. He may also be giving them other instructions, about their every day lives in view of Allah's Word, specific to those times. So where ever we read verses about obeying the Messenger as a representative of Allah means it was a question of authority and discipline. We find in history that there were certain opinions the Messenger gave on matters based on his personal opinion that were not related to Allah's Word and people had a right to accept or excuse themselves . As far as we are concerned, we must follow what Allah through His Messenger left behind and promised to guard it: The Qur'an alone.
2. If the blessed Messenger's sayings and deeds were of the utmost importance (as claimed by Hadith followers) then the question would arise that why were no instructions came down to compile and collect them in a seperate Book for all times to come? It was well known what happened to stories based on hearsay over time: They get corrupted and mixed up with falsehood. The Messenger himself knew well what happened to the Christians who ended up turning man to God and God to man, based on hearsay stories which got written down much later after Jesus (AS)! He could have given insructions to compile a book, verified it and approved it for Muslims of future generations. The first four Caliphs would have done it. Why did they not?
What we have here are collections by Sunnis and Shias often at odds with each other and containing material that clashes with the Qur'an. How can then, deen be based on conjecture and contraversial material collected 220 years after the Messenger passed on, based on hearsay?
Although we can never say for sure if a report of saying/deed is 100% truth, we can allow the possiblity of such material being true if only matches the Qur'an. Also we may read it as students of history to get an idea of the times of those who were gathering this material and a glimpse of early Islamic history. Knowingly and unknowingly we have adopted many practices handed down to us over generations and no harm in following them if they don't clash with the Qur'an.
Now, I have heard from many hadith believers that if the Qur'an was passed on to us with the same accuracy by people over generations, why can't it apply to ahadith? Well, the answer to that is that the Qur'an has an assurance of preservation from Allah. How He does it is His business. No such promise was given to ahadith and the Messengers sunnah. Here cornered, the hadith believers don't give up. They counter Hadith is part of Zikr and part of Hikmah so it is preserved as well by Allah!! Some of them even suggest that this being the case, Hadith abrogates the Qur'an!
Try all you can. You can't win can you? But, as the Qur'an says we must state the truth and guidance is upto Him Alone.