Ibn taymiyyah

[akabirofdeoband]

http://sunnatheologica.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/the-impact-of-ibn-taimiyya-on-southeast-asia.pdf

[akabirofdeoband]

What do the ulema think of this article
Is it reliable?

[akabirofdeoband]

http://sunnatheologica.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/the-impact-of-ibn-taimiyya-on-southeast-asia.pdf

This bit's interesting
It's what Shah Waliullah Said about him

My approach about all Muslim religious thinkers is that they are udul, that is,
they possess correct faith and proper conduct. This is as the Prophet has said: 'In
every age people with piety and faith will represent [interpret] the religion.'
They may believe in certain things on which there may not be unanimity, but if
such matters of their belief are not against the clear Qur'anic injunctions, the
sunnah of the Prophet and the consensus of the community {ijma'), [criticism of
them is not justified]. Our assessment of Ibn Taimiyya after full investigation is
that he was a scholar of the 'Book of God' and had full command over its
etymological and juristic implications. He remembered by heart the traditions
of the Prophet and accounts of elders (salaf) and understood well their
etymological and juristic purpose and meaning. He was a recognized scholar of
syntax (nahw) and semantics (lughat). He was an authority on the Hanbalite
jurisprudence and its principles and branches. He excelled in intelligence and
brilliance. He argued in defence of ahl al-Sunnah with great eloquence and
force. No innovation or irreligious act is reported about him. Only certain
matters on which he was harassed by his contemporaries have been reported to
us. But there is not a single matter on which he is without his defence based on the
Qur'an and the Sunnah. So it is difficult to find a man in the whole world who
possesses the qualities of Ibn Taimiyya. No one can come anywhere near him in
the force of his speech and writing. People who harassed him [and got him
thrown in prison] did not possess even one-tenth of his scholarly excellence ...
In this matter the differences of the 'ulama' resemble the differences of the
Companions of the Prophet and it is necessary to abstain from making any
comments on such matters.

[akabirofdeoband]

Shah Wall Allah then referred item by item to objections against Ibn
Taimiyya—his anthropomorphic ideas, his views about visiting the
tomb of the Prophet, his position vis-a-vis Qutb, Ghawth, Khizr, etc,
and his assessment of the Caliph 'All—and showed that, though one
might disagree, Ibn Taimiyya could not be charged with blasphemy or
heresy on that account. He concluded: 'I exhort Muslims in the name of
God, against maligning him as lalim and mujtahid on such matters of
difference of opinion.'
This defence of Ibn Taimiyya's ideological position had an impact on
contemporary religious thought in South Asia. As his seminary,
Madrasah-i-Rahimya, was the hub of intellectual life in the country,
ideas adumbrated there quickly flowed to wider academic circles. Shah
Wall Allah's son, Shah cAbd al-cAzIz, seems to have been impressed
by Ibn Taimiyya's commentary on Surat al-Niir in his Bustan al-
Muhaddithtn, but in Fatawa-i 'Azizi, he appears critical of some of his
views.