imam dhahabi - in spite of his high rank as a hadith master and historian (whose siyar is a superlative work; and one of my faves) was inimical to ash'aris. and in many cases, he would simply report the rumours without contesting them in case of ash'ari imams; though he would refute them in other cases. in summary, mufti ashraf asif jalali in his zeal to fish out all "gustakh aur unki saza" type narrations, did not take time out to verify. it may be just one slip, but it is clear that he is not well acquainted with the method of verification and forensic analysis. when khatib reports adverse reports about imam abu hanifah, take it with a spoonful of salt. when dhahabi reports about ashayirah, it is the same. and ibn hazm? apart from the fact that he was a literalist madman and probably role-model of ibn taymiyah, he has many "fit to be takfir'd" statements. one should not blindly report everything, just because it is found in a book. one should corroborate from other sources, major ulama, contemporaries and others; especially, when prominent imams are accused of grievous faults we will first critique dhahabi's notice in his siyar and then move on to imam subki's tabaqat and ibn asakir. in sha'Allah wa bi tawfiqihi.