the defense of truth and jihad, and in his relentless commitment to enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong—praise so lavish that I have never seen its like from anyone, nor even sensed it in any jurist.

Elsewhere—where he recorded a lengthy biographical notice about the Shaykh long before the latter’s passing (1)—he wrote: “I say: He possesses thorough expertise in the evaluation of narrators, their criticism and accreditation, and their ranks; a deep command of the various disciplines of hadith, of chains that are elevated or downgraded, and of reports that are sound or weak. Together with this, he memorizes the textual bodies of hadith in a way unique to him; no one of this age attains his station or comes close to it. His ability to summon hadiths and draw proofs from them is astonishing, and the matter of attributing them (2) to the Six Books and to the Musnad ultimately rests with him. It would be no exaggeration to say: ‘Any hadith unknown to Ibn Taymiyyah is no hadith at all.’ Comprehensive knowledge, however, belongs to Allah alone. Still, when he draws from this discipline (3) he ladles from an ocean, whereas other imams scoop from mere rivulets.”