now imam abu'l-walid baji -> takes from imam abu dharr al-harawi (ibn al-sammak) -> who takes from ibn furak. not a word from anyone about the apocryphal story mentioned by dhahabi in his tarikh about ibn furak. none of the historians, imams had said anything close to it. where did dhahabi find it 250 years later, attributing it to ibn furak? you may say - abu'l walid baji as he has mentioned in tarikh. the point is - where? if you say vide ibn Hazm, i will show you ibn Hazm (presently) and it is not there. even turkmani acknowledges that. and such a grave accusation that nobody else knows of it? yet, dhahabi himself keeps praising ibn furak as a righteous imam? we will see that the evidence of its being a lie is present in the story itself. let us see now what dhahabi said in his notice on ibn furak in his tarikh. wa billahi't tawfiq.