Qur'an Challenge to Shaykh Atabek and Sulaiman

You (Shaykh Atabek and Sulaiman) claim to be true Hanafis. You reject sahih hadiths because they don't meet you own "ethics" or "logic" or your interpretation of the Qur'an. You also reject beliefs and laws of the Hanafi madhab, and the beleifs and laws over which there is ijma (consensus), because of the aforementioned reasoning.
I write this post to challenge both Shaykh Atabek Shukurov and his student Sulaiman Ahmed. Previous posts in this blog and others, have still not been answered.
I ask you to answer the following also:

"You claim that only the Qur'an is guaranteed to be preserved, not the hadiths or rest of Islam. Thus when you interpret and understand the Qur'anic verses and reject the explanations based on hadiths (because you reject those sahih hadiths), you base your interpretation on linguistic evidences (including jahili poetry, which is generally based on weak transmissions) and dictionaries and grammatical evidences.
However these dictionaries, grammatical works and linguistic works were written many, many years after the Sahaba, and are nowhere as authenticated as the hadiths (how authentic are the isnads for the dictionaries, grammatical and linguistic points, transmissions and works?). If you reject sahih hadiths (sahih based on isnad and considered sahih by most of the masters of Hadiths) because they don't meet your own "ethics" or "logic" or your interpretation of the Qur'an, then logically it means you have to reject all the linguistic and grammatical transmissions, dictionaries, works and evidences that are required for understanding the Qur'an.
Once you reject these, then the Qur'an is no longer considered preserved, since you don't know the Arabic that existed at the time of the sahaba, so you don't know what the Qur'an means. Your reasoning and methodology is logically fallacious and destroys Islam. It also shows that you are a pseudo-Hanafi who has founded a jahili sect called Atabekism.
How do you answer this?"

The true Hanafi methodology is to understand the Qur'an in light of the Sahih Hadiths and Sunnah and ijma. An interpretation of the Qur'an which clearly contradicts the sahih hadiths, sunnah and ijma, is rejected.
For each sahih hadith that Atabek rejects in the name of "Hanafi principles", one just needs to ask whether the great Hanafi Hadith masters like al-Ayni rejected those Hadiths? If they didn't (and they generally didn't), then it shows that Atabek isn't a true Hanafi but is an Atabekite, which is a mix of Mu'tazili principles with Shaytanic nafs.

Shaykh Atabek and Ibn Hazm

Shaykh Atabek claimed that Ibn Hazm was an Ash'ari. The video where he made the claim has been removed since it shows the ignorance and low knowledge of Atabek Shukurov. Here are the facts about Ibn Hazm:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq4.htm

Per the above link, Ibn Hazm was a Dhahiri (they were very rarely Ash'ari) and "Ibn Hazm criticized Ash‘arism on the basis of what had reached him about it, though to read his main work on tenets of faith, the five-volume al-Fisal bayn al-milal wa nihal [Distinction between religions and sects] (Beirut: Dar al-Jil, n.d.) one finds that he was an Ash‘ari on tenets of faith (‘aqida) in everything but name, with the exception of one question, which was that he believed that Allah’s omnipotence related not only to creating the possible (al-mumkin) but to the impossible as well. He is reported to have said, "If Allah had wanted, He could have begotten a son," which conflicts with the Ash‘ari position that the inherently impossible, such as this, or such as "creating a square circle" are mere verbal absurdities, and not relevant to the divine attribute of omnipotence, such that it could be asked whether or not Allah could create them."

Baydawi a Hanafi?

Shaykh Atabek Shukurov in his book "Hanafi principles of testing hadith" in his prologue, claims that Imam Baydawi is a Hanafi. This is a large blunder since everyone knows that he was a major Shafi school.
He is not mentioned in any of the Hanafi tabaqat works but is mentioned in many of the Shafi tabaqat works, and wrote a work on Shafi usool.