The statement, “He sides with the Muʿtazila on this point,” is a blatant fabrication, for in this matter he follows the majority of Ahl al-Sunnah, and the abundant scriptural proofs fully support the conclusion he reached. Can it really be deemed erroneous—or labeled Muʿtazilite—to affirm that God possesses a wisdom intrinsic to Him, a wisdom that He loves and is pleased with, and for whose sake He acts? The Almighty does whatever He does for a purpose He knows, and He discloses part of that wisdom to some of His servants, while other aspects remain hidden from them. Universal acts, such as His sending of Muhammad ﷺ, are undertaken for a general wisdom and a comprehensive mercy, as He says: “We have only sent you as a mercy to all the worlds” (Q 21:107). Likewise, every perceived harm in the cosmos must serve a wise purpose, for He says: “That is the handiwork of God, who perfected all things” (Q 27:88) and “who made excellent everything He created” (Q 32:7). Harm that realizes a required wisdom is not absolute evil, even though it may be evil relative to the one who suffers it. The more a servant’s knowledge and faith increase, the more he is dazzled by God’s wisdom and mercy, and the clearer becomes the truth of His promise: “We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth” (Q 41:53). See Majmuat al-Rasail wa-l-Masaʾil, vol. 5, p. 122 ff. The remark, “Had our shaykh known this, he would have suppressed all mention of the debate,” is an accusation that al-Subki’s own teacher, al-Dhahabi, failed to understand the issue. Al-Subki makes similar insinuations elsewhere. Yet al-Dhahabi’s penetrating intellect, prodigious memory, sound grasp of texts, and exceptional ability to present them in a lucid, straightforward style need no defense; his works, including the present book, amply demonstrate these qualities. Because al-Subki recognizes truth only in what the Ashʿarites concluded, he ignores all this, branding his teacher as slow-witted, accusing him of recording what he does not comprehend, and alleging that he is ignorant of linguistic nuances—charges born of malice and partisanship. A look at the preface to this book, as well as al-Sakhawi’s Iʿlan bi-t-Tawbikh, pp. 76–77, will show any fair reader that al-Subki’s claims against his teacher al-Dhahabi are groundless, driven solely by bias and sectarian zeal. Bibliographic references: Tabsir al-Muntabih, 3/1000; al-ʿAdhari — attribution to the tribe ʿAdhara b. Saʿd b. Hudhaym.