What is the response to Subki's criticism of Dhahabi in "Tabaqat al-Shafi'iyyah al-Kubra" (Vol. 2, p. 22) regarding his accusation of bigotry, excessive criticism of the people of religion and wealth for the Ash'aris, and praise for the Mujassimah?

Al-Dhahabi was the Imam of his era in knowledge, and even Al-Taj Al-Subki himself attested to this. However, Al-Subki’s statement that Al-Dhahabi’s historical methodology was based on bias was a slip of the pen and an expression of love for the people of his own madhhab, as he thought Al-Dhahabi was disparaging the people of his madhhab by not elaborating on their biographies.

The general principle is that the statements of peers about each other should be disregarded and not narrated unless they are based on scholarly criticism. Scholars are human and make mistakes, but they should not be accused of errors they did not commit. Al-Sakhawi mentioned that Al-Subki accused Al-Dhahabi of negligence and bias, something Al-Subki himself fell into in a more egregious manner.

Al-Dhahabi’s methodology in his biographies was not as such. Siyar A'lam al-Nubala' is a unique encyclopedia of biographies, and he did not disparage or belittle anyone who disagreed with him. Rather, he mentioned the innovations of innovators appropriately, without excess or negligence. Al-Shawkani praised Al-Dhahabi’s works, considering them acceptable and desirable, and stated that people are dependent on him in the art of history, and that Al-Subki exaggerated in denouncing him without proof.

Furthermore, Dr. Bashar Awwad defended Al-Dhahabi, affirming that he was not biased towards the Hanbalis, but rather was a hadith scholar who loved the people of hadith. He added that any brevity in the biographies of some Ash'aris was due to Al-Dhahabi’s reluctance to extensively transmit the views of opponents, out of his desire for ease.