the matter won't end there. in sha'Allah wa bi tawfiqihi i will try to show how atabek the donkey made false accusations on imams. we will examine what atabek the donkey did with the hadith of siHr (magic) and how he falsely accused qaDi iyaD and major scholars of ahl al-sunnah by putting words in their mouth. in sha'Allah. ---- i expect it to be a lengthy post, but here is a summary. see, you can distort a good thing by using those synonyms which have the worst connotations and have a very negative implication. ---- brief explanation: why i consider him a kafir i consider atabek the scoundrel as a kafir because, he took hadith from bukhari and distorted it and translated in the most insulting and blasphemous manner. this is not the same as rejecting a musnad, SaHiH, muttafaq alayh hadith, the rejection of which is also an evil thing, but it could be argued that the person could not find it compatible with sunni aqidah and therefore he disagrees/rejects. however, atabek - because of the filth filled in head and heart deliberately mistranslated the words and shamelessly posted in public - a muslim with ghayrah would balk at uttering such words even as citation (which is why i do istighfar many times - and i wish i didn't have to do it). so this is not a product of confusion - it is a deliberate distortion of hadith (which in itself is evil) and using blasphemous language to describe the prophet, making fun of the hadith and mocking the imams. apart from that, he has mocked basic aqayid of Muslims, calling them stupid and idiotic and fabrications and lies - making fun of our belief in destiny and many other fundamental aspects of religion. he is a kafir for istihzaa'; kafir for blasphemy and so forth. a dear brother suggested that i write a short essay, which i cannot afford to do at the moment. there are better things to do than prove atabek the donkey is a filthy murtad. if you are a person with a beating heart, you will know deep down that only a faithless brute will utter such things. wAllahu a'alam. ----- the word 'bastard' has come a long way - until a few decades ago, it only meant an illegitimate child, one born out of wedlock. a "Haram-zaad". but in modern slang - check the dictionaries - it means a vile or a vicious person. ************************************************************************* Slang. a vicious, despicable, or thoroughly disliked person: Some bastard slashed the tires on my car. a person, especially a man: The poor bastard broke his leg. ************************************************************************** it is no secret that i consider atabek "a vicious, despicable and a thoroughly disliked person". however, if atabek claims: "aH calls atabek a bastard." and based on his master's brays, the little donkey bleats "this requires aH to produce 4 witnesses or be administered the Hadd (al-iyadhu billah)" and produce hotch-potch quotes from Hanafi fiqh on qadhaf, [assuming that the zanadiqah believe in Hudud; otherwise, irony will weep]. then they go about doing a maori haka about the whole thing... is this fair? now, to prove his claim that "aH called him a bastard", if he produces this line from the dictionary: a vicious, despicable, or thoroughly disliked person: it is only a stretch of a filthy imagination. i never called him a 'bastard' but YES! i consider atabek "a vicious, despicable, or thoroughly disliked person." remember this is atabek's method. ========================================== DON'T GO AWAY!! JUST A LITTLE MORE... ========================================== people might be offended and deem this to be a gross example. and if you are among those people, think how it feels when atabek uses such a method to mis-translate hadith of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, and attribute to imams of hadith and the words of hadith itself - vile and despicable words to describe prophets. na'udhu billah, wa nas'alu Allaha al-`aafiyah ---- atabek says spinning off on the bad translation of the hadith of magic: "sexual impotence" - this is only a case of a thief imagining the whole world to be a thief. maybe atabek is an عنين and thinks that there is only one word to describe a loss of libido. the hadith only mentions loss of libido - or interest in conjugal relations. "sexual impotence" is عنين "inneen". momentary loss of sex drive happens to everyone - when people are tired, worried, anxious, etc. for example, most people above 70s lose the sex-drive; only a filthy and rotten mind would describe all the grandfathers and elderly shuyukh as "sexually impotent". either everyone in atabek's family died young and virile - or if there is anyone old, atabek will call them "sexually impotent". if atabek lives to an age beyond 70, and if any of us are still around, we must make it a point to call him - "the impotent shaykh". atabek will now have to pray that he dies young [assuming he is not already an impotent man, but let us leave him to his privacy...] to save himself from that ignominy. this of course, humans understand - donkeys don't. and that is why atabek describes it in a weird manner. ---- "losing mind" - being 'distracted' 'forgetful' 'inattentive' is not the same as losing one's mind. the hadith only mentions that because of the effects of magic, RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was inattentive and distracted - and sort of tired. this is what all explanations - ibn Hajar and qaDi iyaD have made. atabek the kazzab, atabek the scoundrel, atabek the donkey has made up all those accusations and based on inventions of his own filthy mind, he is mocking hadith and ayimmah. لا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله ---- coming up next, in sha'Allah the explanation of the hadith from shifa sharif, sharh al-shifa, ikmal al-mu'lim, nawawi's minhaj, ibn Hajar in fat'H al-bari etc. wa billahi't tawfiq.
just in case people miss the quip, here is the sharH of what janab aqib sahib just said: either atabek studied religion, or he did not - he just got a secular education; as he says here: now, since atabek claims that he has studied religion (check out his heavy sounding resume), and following his profound statement: ergo, he comes from a miserable family - unless of course, he claims that he should not be counted among 'children', because atabek is a donkey.
this is a good illustration of the statement: 'even a chronic liar may sometimes tell the truth.' and the wretches among them pretend to study the religion; the scoundrels among them, become claimants to being 'scholars', without any knowledge. they use these titles and false resumes to cheat people and garner dunya. these people have no adab when addressing scholars, not even awliya and prophets. for example, in our times, look no further than atabek the donkey and his follower the dunayki. --- a king and his party lost their way in a forest. after considerable wandering, they sat down to rest. they were all thirsty and they sent one of the foot soldiers to go look for a water source. it was decided that they should not disclose that it was the king's party. the soldier chanced upon a hut, and indeed, there was an old man - and he was blind. the soldier went up to him and said: "hey you, blind fellow! can you give me water?" the man refused. the soldier came to the camp and told his captain and then he, to the prime minister. the prime minister said that he would personally go to fetch water as the king was very thirsty by now. so he went to the blind man and said: "look my man, we are thirsty and you should give us some water." the man refused. the PM came back to the king and told him that a blind man was refusing them water. so the king said, 'let me try', and he went. the king came to the blind man and said: "sir, we are travellers lost in the forest. we have been roaming without direction and we are very thirsty. if you can please give us some water, we will be indebted to your kindness". the man said: 'o my king! this is your kingdom. you can take what you want - and btw, your minister and soldier had come earlier' the king was surprised and asked how could he tell that they were king, minister and soldier. the man replied: 'people are known by their speech. the first man was rude and called me a blind man. this shows his rough and ordinary upbringing. then there was a minister who tried to sound important. but politeness is found in people with good upbringing and cultured families, and i supposed that this is the manner of a king to ask nicely and politely.' إن الكلام لفي الفؤاد وإنما جعل اللسان علي الفؤاد دليلا ======= when you see a person who is uncouth and has no hesitation in using taboo words when referring to prophets, you know that this is not just a rotten fruit - the root is itself rotten to the core. نسأل الله العافية
A request: for everyone's benefit, please list down - in summary form - the reasons for their being considered murtadds.
As Salamu 'Alaykum Wa RaHmatullahi Wa Barakatu, Mawlana Abu Hasan, to clarify, in addition to the donkey, we also consider his student Sulayman as a disbeliever correct?
why, is it surprising? the zanadiqah respect only their filthy nafs (or lick the boots of their paymasters) -
The looney atabek and his chubby Sikh looking student just committed suicide, all those months they were demonizing qadi iyad and other Aimmah for accepting sihr and its effects. They even talked about the Holy Prophet in a way which was most heneious and vile. And in this article the donkey admitted that the imams never used such words. They accept now that it was them inventing these vile comments and talking disgustingly about it. Their sole purpose was to instigate hate for the Aimmah in order to deprive them from the trust they had for the imams. Next to accept them as people who know better, so they can sell their books and courses. These people are true munafiq they actually don't care about the Holy Prophet. Hence they invented these terms, perhaps they also talk to their mother the same way.
atabek's biography: https://www.storyarts.org/library/aesops/stories/under.html another version: http://fablesofaesop.com/the-ass-in-the-lions-skin.html =========== “What pranks I shall play!” thought the Ass, In this skin for a Lion to pass; But he left one ear out, And a hiding, no doubt, “Lion” had-on the skin of an Ass! Moral: Imposters generally forget something. [in atabek the donkey's case lots of things - even the lions skin...]
the donkey brays - and most of the time he wants to push his stupid opinion to replace facts and objective analysis. i will read his lengthy braying later. but atabek the donkey needs a lot of flogging before the fat donkey stops braying. atabek and his followers. --- for all his claims of being an "intellectual" atabek the donkey cannot escape slavish thinking which is - for example modesty and propriety is according to atabek's standards; what if something is mentioned in the hadith against atabek the donkey's whims? why, you reject the hadith of course! al-iyadhu billah. story about the donkey who lost his tail.
"Rejecting Maturidi for Bukhari" https://shaykhatabekshukurov.com/2016/05/15/rejecting-theology-for-hadith/
This page is dedicated to refuting modernist notions being propagated in the name of the Hanafi madhab. Modernist/liberal views have been a problem in Islam these past few decades especially, however we view a recent phenomenon these days. We observe that these modernist/liberal views are being propagated under the guise of classical Islam, more specifically being portrayed as the representative position of the classical Hanafi school of Jurisprudence. In this page, we will be sharing articles which aim to demonstrate that these views are nothing short of academic dishonesty and a grave ignorance of what the Hanafi school has truly said on the certain topics which will be highlighted. https://independent.academia.edu/RefutingModernistHanafis
maybe i cannot spot the difference. alHamdulillah, i have been reading imam maturidi's books for quite a while now. but i didn't find it challenging. and just because atabek happens to be an uzbek (as samarqand is in uzbekistan just as bukhara, kasan, ferghana, khiva/khawarizm and nasaf/qarshi) - by virtue of which he instinctly knows all the secrets of the ulama of samarqand, bukhara, farghana, khawarizm, nasaf and kasan. if you are not born an uzbek - tch.tch. - you may claim to be a maturidi, but you are just a half-blood maturidi. real knowledge will come to you ONLY if you are an uzbek. --- now, what if the people of makkah/madinah make a same claim that everyone outside the Hijaz are half-blood muslims? also, true muslims and the true knowledge of the deen is found ONLY in the Hijaz? whatever, but we know that voldatabek knows the most complex form of arabic, the central asian style - perhaps even more complex and higher than the qurashi arabic. --- wake up dung-eaters (just as followers of voldemort were death-eaters, the followers of voldatabek the donkey are dung-eaters)
let us talk about imam maturidi's kitab al-tawHid; which the pseudo-maturidi atabek was praising as late as yesterday (8th may post - in which atabek the barbarian is shown here): highlights mine even a third-rate ad agency can do better than this. FUD. FUD. and more FUD. what else can you expect from such hollow insides? ----- i will take the brown part (of maturidi's unique arabic, "the central asian style" being uniquely complex - which atabek is the only known surviving expert) later. but first, let us knock his claim of being a true maturidi follower. around 2.00 see his self-anointment of being "expert on Hanafi uSul" ---- and here is imam maturidi's opinion where he cites the hadith: "whoever becomes an apostate, execute [kill] him". ======================== that means: atabek is a bigger maturidi than imam maturidi himself, because: 1. imam maturidi uses an aaHad hadith 2. does not argue against punishment for apostasy - because if he did, his objection would not hold [notice he uses this objection to counter mutazili objection] 3. imam maturidi does not know "Hanafi muSTalaH". 4. imam maturidi does not know that qur'anic verses mention apostasy, but not the punishment. and so forth.
just bookmarking for the future, when threads will be buried: atabek's pseudo-maturidi ideas exposed here: http://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/atabeks-apologist-mr-stench.13315/
imam maturidi says: that in what has been said that black magic was done upon RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam, there are two aspects which actually validates his prophethood and messengership [nubuwwat and risalat], SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. --- compare this with the braying of pseudo-maturidi donkeys. --- al-iyadhu billah.
and because atabek may throw a fit that my [printed] copy of the tafsir is incorrect. so here it is from the same copy he has cited in his latest post of 8th may (in which atabek is labelled as a haggard barbarian).
atabek throws all kinds of tantrums concerning the hadith that magic was done on RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam - atabek's language is exceedingly filthy. but atabek also attaches the status of tawatur to maturidis tafsir. in atabek's version, the only book after qur'an which SHOULD be accepted without a murmur is "tawilat" or tafsir of imam abu manSur maturidi - in the present printed form. hopefully atabek and co. will be able to produce an uninterrupted chain of narrators who can vouch for the authenticity (and attribution) of every word in that tafsir, to imam abu mansur maturidi. ----- let us assume they are magicians and will be able to do that. apparently in this very book, imam maturidi does not agree with atabek. see in surah #113, al-falaq, imam maturidi acknowledges that magic was done on RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. pseudo maturidis throw a fit - and use unbefitting language to describe it. ---- ta'wilat ahl al-sunnah / vol.10 p.653
