24 Alina Kokoschka and Birgit Krawietz
dinary personal humility – an attitude that in some modern settings
might be perceived as downright pathological. Ibn al-Qayyim would
never voice criticism of Ibn Taymiyya even if some occurred to him.
It is inadequate on the part of Western Islamic Studies to expect that
Ibn al-Qayyim should explicitly distinguish himself via criticism of
Ibn Taymiyya in order to signal being his own man. It is also inept to
demand this kind of criticism as a starting point from which his schol-
arly merits can be inferred. It cannot be overlooked that figures like
Ibn al-Qayyim are much less appreciated among non-Muslims and
that his habitus is taken as an unmistakable sign of inferiority, often
triggering contempt. In contrast, Ibn Taymiyya’s cocky aggressiveness
and air of superiority represent the ultimate alternative model to the
devotional piety and intellectual long-windedness of Ibn al-Qayyim.
This does not mean that Ibn Taymiyya is highly esteemed everywhere,
but he is definitely “respected” – either as a great theologian/scholar/
activist or as a powerful, dangerous villain (whose violent “impact”
is felt even centuries later). Despite the wide range of congruence in
terms of doctrine and methodology shared by the two authors, in
recent times Ibn Taymiyya has met modern European-bred Western
expectations of ingenuity to a much greater degree; he bears, after all,
their “unmistaken” insignia, like self-aggrandizement and cultivation
of sudden inspiration. It is a strange coincidence of history that this
duo represents such contrasting ends of the scale in matters of habi-
tus and self-presentation. However, apart from the strikingly comple-
mentary symbiosis between Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim, we
surmise that there are other phenomena that are relevant to Islamic
Studies which likewise emanate from the same overall cultural dispo-
sition: we propose, for example, the utter Orientalist/Western fond-
ness for and strange aestheticization of “independent” Islamic juris-
prudence (ijtihād), the prevalent lamenting rhetoric about the closing
of its door and about the evil principle of imitation (taqlīd). However,
space does not allow us to follow up on this or similar other narra-
tives. Hence, we must finally turn to a constructive reconfiguration of
Ibn al-Qayyim’s intellectual calibre and propagate an alternative or,
rather, complementary model of scholarly ingenuity. The widespread
impression of eclecticism can be challenged by suggesting the con-
cept of the appropriation of especially postclassical Arabic writings
on theology, jurisprudence and philosophy. While in the field of cul-
tural and social studies, literature studies, or arts the angle has shifted
toward a new approach to creativity and originality, an equivalent is
Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University
Authenticated