“our master, the Imām,” and on every single one of those pages he couples that title with a prayer that Allah have mercy on him—he never misses it, not even once! The pages are (52, 59, 69, 71, 83, 92, 95, 97, 104, 105, 107, 132, 138, 148, 172, 176, 184, 203, 221, 234). Indeed, on page (97) he names him twice and invokes mercy for him both times! Yet on page (104) he mentions Ibn Taymiyyah without any prayer for mercy or other wording that might suggest the alleged reverence; four lines later he writes, “Our master, the Imām al-Kawtharī—may Allah Almighty have mercy on him—has pointed out….” On the facing page he says, “Here ends the words of our master, the Imām al-Kawtharī—may Allah Almighty have mercy on him.”

More than this, he places both names in a single line, praying for al-Kawtharī alone and not for Ibn Taymiyyah. He says (p. 276): “Our master, the Imām al-Kawtharī—may Allah sanctify his soul—criticized Ibn Taymiyyah for his excessive rigor…,” and so on—the entire passage is reproduced (p. 70).

One of his ruses and schemes is that, in the list of pages he cited as proof of his respect for Shaykh al-Islām, he deliberately omitted page (176), because the quotation found there from al-Kawtharī lays bare his shame and uncovers the spite and slander he harbors against the Shaykh, simply echoing his teacher al-Kawtharī—may Allah requite them both with justice.

His craftiness and malice appear yet again when he writes about Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb (p. 19) while denying the charge of takfīr leveled against him:

“These are illustrious imams, among the finest of believing scholars—learned, upright, and callers to Allah Most High. Whoever wishes to brand them fools or madmen might as well consign the imams of Islam—these noble masters—to disbelief.

Grant, if you will, that I declared morning to be night—
Would all mankind then be blind to the light?”