𝙄𝙗𝙣 𝙖𝙡-𝙅𝙖𝙬𝙯𝙞 (𝙙.597𝘼𝙃) 𝙨𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙖𝙡-𝙆𝙝𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗 𝙖𝙡-𝘽𝙖𝙜𝙝𝙙𝙖𝙙𝙞 𝙬𝙖𝙨...

𝙄𝙗𝙣 𝙖𝙡-𝙅𝙖𝙬𝙯𝙞 (𝙙.597𝘼𝙃) 𝙨𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙖𝙡-𝙆𝙝𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗 𝙖𝙡-𝘽𝙖𝙜𝙝𝙙𝙖𝙙𝙞 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙛𝙖𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡 𝙞𝙣 𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙨𝙪𝙥𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙢𝙪𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙞𝙢𝙪𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘼𝙨𝙝‘𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙨:

Ibn al-Jawzi says:

Abu Zur‘ah Tahir Ibn Muhammad Ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi informed us, from his father, who said: I heard Isma‘il Ibn Abi al-Fadl al-Qawmisi, and he was among the people of knowledge in hadith, say:

“Three of the hadith scholars (huffaz) I do not like due to their excessive partisanship and lack of fairness:
al-Hakim Abu Abdillah, Abu Nu‘aym al-Isbahani, and Abu Bakr al-Khatib.”

The author (Ibn al-Jawzi) said:

“Isma‘il spoke the truth, and he was among the senior reliable hadith scholars, trustworthy and honest, well-acquainted with narrators and hadith texts, and strong in religious devotion. He heard from Abu al-Husayn Ibn al-Muhtadi, Jabir Ibn Yasin, Ibn al-Naqqur, and others.
He spoke the truth, for al-Hakim was inclined toward Shi‘ism, openly displaying it, and the other two were fanatical for the mutakallimun and the Ash‘aris.”

[Ibn al-Jawzi’s ‘ Al-Muntazam’ 16/134 Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut Edition]

Also Ibn al-Jawzi said:

"al-Khatib exaggerates with cold fanaticism when criticizing our companions, and when he mentions the mutakallimun from among the Ash‘aris and others, he glorifies their status and recounts their virtues to the point of near impossibility."

[Ibn al-Jawzi’s ‘Dar'u al-Lawm’ p.45 Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah Edition]

Personally I believe Ibn al-Jawzi exaggerated here as al-Khatib was one of the least fanatical scholars aligned with the Ashari’s.

Ibn al-Jawzi’s gripe with al-Khatib is unfair as the latter, as Muallimi pointed out, was only doing his job in terms of his craft in mentioning both the praise and criticism of people.

So sometimes al-Khatib narrates from people who were even Mutazili if he deemed them trustworthy and relies on their narration in criticism of a Hanbali or non Hanbali who wasn’t trustworthy