the Hanbalis.” Al-Dhahabi then added in commentary: “Muhammad ibn Jarir was one of those who, for the sake of Allah, feared no reproach from any critic, despite the severe harm and ugly slanders he endured from the ignorant, the envious, and the heretical. (1)

In his notice of ʿAbd al-Satir ibn ʿAbd al-Hamid Taqi al-Din al-Hanbali (d. 679 AH) he wrote: “He became proficient in the school. Someone who heard from him said that he was boisterous, excessive in his championing of the Sunnah, hostile to the scholastic theologians, and extreme in literal adherence to the texts … He was a rough-mannered Hanbali, seething with hostility toward the Ashʿari; he made many claims but had little knowledge. (2)”

Notwithstanding al-Dhahabi’s admiration for his teacher Ibn Taymiyya, he still reproached him for “his harshness, roughness, blunt phrasing, and the painful, distressing rebukes that stirred people’s spirits,” (3) and also for “pride, self-admiration, an excessive passion for presiding over the seat of teaching, and disdain for the senior scholars.” (4)

He further observed that some of Ibn Taymiyya’s legal opinions stood apart from the rest of the umma, saying: “He issued singular fatwas for which his reputation suffered, yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. May Allah pardon him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen his like. Every member of the umma has statements that may be accepted and others that may be rejected—so what of it? (5)”

Al-Dhahabi’s zeal for critique and rigorous verification even led him to speak of his own son, Abu Hurayra ʿAbd al-Rahman, saying that he had memorized the Quran, then became distracted and forgot it. (6)

I am not here to defend the man, for his writings are the best defense on his behalf, and they