Al-Ghazzaliy: A Study in Islamic Epistemology.

AL A STUDY IN ISLAMIC

EPISTEMOLOGY

GHAIIALIYY

AL I A STUDY IN ISLAMICEPISTEMOLOGY

GHAUALIYY

MUSTAFA ABU-SWAY

Dewan Bahasa dan PustakaKuala Lumpur

1996

First Printing 1996© Dr. MustafaAbu-Sway 1996

All Rights Reserved.No part of this book may be reproducedortransmittedin anyform or by anymeans,electronicor mechanical,including photocopying,recording, or by any information storageand retrieval system, without permission in writing from theDirector General, Dewan Bahasadan Pustaka,P.O. Box 10803,50926 Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia. Negotiation is subject to thecalculationof royalty or honorarium.

PerpustakaanNegaraMalaysia

Abu-Sway,MustafaA1-Ghazzaliyy:a studyinAbu-SwayBibliography: p. 171ISBN 983-62-5151-01.Ghazzali, 1058—1111.I. Title.921

Cataloguing-in-PublicationData

Islamic epistemology/Mustafa

2. Philosophy,Islamic-Biography

Printed byPercetakanDewanBahasadanPustakaLot 1037, Mukim PerindustrianPKNSAmpang/Hulu KelangSelangorDarul Ehsan

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ix

CHAPTERONE -

THE LIFE OF AL-GRAZZALIYY 1

1.1 THE POLITICAL SCENE 2

1.1.1 A1-Ghazzàliyyand theOtherSchoolsof Jurisprudence 5

1.1.2 A1-Ghazzãliyyand the Sectsof theTime 7

1.1.3 TheCrusades 12

1.2 HIS EARLY LIFE

1.3 HIS EDUCATION AND ACADEMIC CAREER 17

1.3.1 Fonual Education 17

1.3.2 TeachIngat the Nizamiyyah; the“Spiritual Crisis” 19

1.3.3 The Journeys of A1-Ghazzãliyy 23

1.3.4 A1-Ghazzãliyyand theScienceof Hadith 27

1.4 THE CREEDOFAL-GHAZZALIYY 31

V

CONTENTS

CHAPTER TWOAL-GHAZZALfl’Y’S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGEAS A STUDENT (465-478 A.H./1072-1088 CS) 37

2.1 AL-TA’LIQAH 37

2.2 AL-A’LANKHUL: THE QUESTIONOFAUTHENTICITY 38

2.2.1 Usülal-Ftqh 40

2.2.2 A1-Qiyds(analogicalreasonIng) 42

2.2.3 A1-Ghazzaliyy’sPositionon ScienceandReasonin A1-Mankh&1 43

2.2.4 TheSourcesof Knowledge 51

2.2.5 Al-Ghazzaliyy’s Theoryof Language 52

2.3 DELIVERANCE FROM ERROR(AL-MUNQIDHMIN AL-DALAL) 54

2.4 CONCLUSION 55

CHAPTERTHREEAL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE FIRST PERIOD OF PUBLIC TEACHING(478-488A,H./1085 C.E.) 59

3.1 ON FIQH. MUNAZAF?AHAND USULAL-FIQH 60

3.1.1 On Jurisprudence 60

3.1.2 On the Methods of Debate 61

3.1.3 On the Fundamentalsof Jurisprudence 62

3.2 AL-GHAZZALIYY’S SCEPTICISM 63

3.3 SKEPTICISMAND THE CLASSESOF SEEKERS 67

3.4 ON DIALECTICAL THEOLOGY (‘ILMAL-KALAM) 69

3.5 AL-GHAZZALIYTS ENCOUNTERWITH 70PHILOSOPHY

Vi

CONTENTS

3.6 AL-GHAZZALIYY’S CRITIQUE OF PHIWSOPHY 80

3.7 AL-GHAZZALIYY’S SEARCHCONTINUES;THE CONFRONTATIONWITH THE ESOTERICS[AL-BATINIYYAH1 89

3.8 AL-GHAZZALIYY BECOMING A SUFI 92

3.9 AL-GHAZZALIYY’S EPISTEMOLOGYIN HISWRITINGSON CREED 95

3.10 CONCLUSION 98

CHAPTERFOURAL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE YEARS OF SECLUSION(488-499A.H./1095—1106 C.E.) 101

4.1 lI-WA’ ‘ULUM AL-DIN 103

4.1.1 On the Scienceof Action(‘urn al-Mu‘àrnalah) 104

4.1.2 The Sociologyof Knowledge 109

4.1.3 On the Division of the Sciences 110

4.1.4 On the Intellect (Al- ‘AqO 114

4.1.5 On DialecticalTheology(‘lirn al-Kalãm) 118

4.1.6 On Philosophy 118

4.1.7 On Creed(‘Aqtdah) 121

4.1.8 On Dreams 122

4.1.9 Conclusion 123

4.2 AL-MAQSADAL-ASNAFISHARH

ASMA’ALLAHAL-HUSNA

4.3 BIDAYATAL-HIDAYAH 124

4.4 CIA WAHIRAL-QUR’AN 124

4.5 AL-RISALAHAL-LADUNNIYYAH 128

vil

CONTENTS

4.6 MISHKATAL-ANWAR 130

4.7 CONCLUSION 133

CHAPTER FIVEAL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE SECOND PERIOD OF PUBLIC TEACHING(499-503A.H./1106-11lO C,E.) 135

5.1 AL-MUNQIDH MIN AL-DALAL 136

5.1.1 The Influenceof ol-MurtqidhonDescartes 142

5.1.2 The Stagesof EpistemologicalDevelopmentin Human Beings 144

5.2 AL-MUSTASFAMIN ‘ILMAL-USUL 145

5.3 AL-IMLA’ J~J~4ISHKALATAL-Il-WA’ 149

CHAPTERSIXAL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE SECOND WITHDRAWAL FROM PUBLICTEACHING(503—505A.H./1110—l111C.E.) 151

6.1 AL-DURRAHAL-FAKI-IIRAHFl KASHF ‘ULIJM

AL-AKHIRAH 152

6.2 ILIJAMAL- ‘AWAM AN ‘ILM AL-KAIAM 154

6.3 MINHAJAL- ‘ABIDIN 156

6.4 CONCLUSION 161

CONCLUSION 163

BIBLIOGRAPHY 171

INDEX 177

viii

INTRODUCTION

The basicissuethat this bookwill be concernedwith is thegeneticdevelopmentof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s epistemology.It ismy contention that his epistemologyevolved through va-rious stages.Both his life and writings reflect this deve-lopment.As a student,he beganhis academiclife with aninterest in traditional Islamic studies such as jurispru-dence (flqh) and fundamentalsof jurisprudence (u~ülal-fiqh). Alter he assumedhis first teachingposition at theNizamlyyah school of Baghdadhe becamea methodolo-gical skeptic,a situation which promptedhim to study allschoolsof thoughtavailable at the lime in searchfor per-emptoryknowledge(‘Urn yaqlnO.From skepticismhemovedto Suflsm (Islamic mysticism), and finally there are hid!-cations that he endedup studying the traditions (Hadlth)of prophetMuhammad,which led many to claim that heshifted to the methodologyof the traditionalists (AN at-Hadith) andthat he abandonedSujIsm. It is theaim of thisstudyto traceAl-Ghazzàliyy’s questfor knowledgethrough-out his life.

This study will take into considerationthe historicalcircumstancesandthesocialcontextinwhichAl-Ghazzaliyyflourished. It is my convictionthat thesecircumstancesin-fluencedhis personaland thushis intellectuallife aswell.

PREVIOUSSTUDIES

TherearenumerouspreviousstudiesofAl-Ghazzäliyy.How-

Ix

INTRODUCTION

ever, most of these studies dealt with subjects such asSufism, ethicsandjurisprudence. While avery few of thesestudies dealt with Al-Ghazzaliyy’s epistemology, none ofthem could be consideredcomprehensive:no studiessofarhaveusedall ofhisbooksto determinehisepistemology.Andcertainly,thesestudiesdid notshowthegeneticdevelopmentthat took placein his thought.

One of the studiesthat dealtwith A1-Ghazzaliyy’sno-tion of knowledge (rna’rtfah) is Jabre’s La Notion Dc La“Ma’nfa” ChezAl-GhazalL Although he discussedthe rela-tionship of ethics to the notion of rnanfah, his approachremains philological.’ This philological method was alsousedby Hava-LazarousYafeh primarily to determinetheauthenticityof A1-Ghazzaliyy’sworks.2

Another study that discussedAI-Ghazzãliyy’s theoiyof knowledge is Dunya’s Al-Haqiqah El NazarAl-GhazalL3This studywaslimited in Its sourcesanddependedheavilyon Mi’raj Al-Quds, a book that was attributed to A1-Ghaz-zaliyy but remains unconfirmed becausenon of the me-dieval Muslim historiographerslisted this book, nor therearecross-referencesIn Al-Ghazzaliyy’s confirmedbooks.

I haveundertakenthe task of studying all of A1-Ghaz-zaliyy’s works in orderto tracethe developmentin his epis-temology. The basicworking list canbe found in Badawi’sMu’allafãtAl-GhazãlL numbers1—72.~Thecriteria forchoos-ing thesebooks are based on any of the two followingconditions: thefirst is thatthereshouldbe cross-referencesin AI-Ghazzaliyy’s works, as it was his habit to mentionbooksthat hewrote, or thosehewasgoingtowrite, andthesecondis that it has to be mentionedby medievalhisto-riographers such as in Ibn A1-Subklyy’s Tabaqàt at-ShaJI’iyyahal-Kubrã. This book is abiographyof thejuristswho belong to the Shãfi’iyy’s school of jurisprudence;Al-

1 FarAd Jabre, La Notfrj,n De La 9Marifcf Cltez Al-Ghazali (Beyrouth:Editions desLetters Orlentales, 1958).

2 Hava-Lazarous Yateh, Studies in Al-Ghazaii (Jerusalem: The MagnusPress— Hebrew UnIversity, 1975).

3 Sulalman Dunya, A1-Haqiqo.hflNazarA1-Ghazali(Cairo: Dar Al-Ma’arlfBi-MIsr, 1965).

4 ‘Abdur-Rahman Badawl, Mu’aUafat Al-Gho.zzallyy, 2nd ed. (KuwaIt:wikalat al-Matbu’at, 1977) p. 244.

5 Badawi, Mu’allafat, pp. 1—238.

x

INTRODUCTION

Ghazzaliyywas one of them.6While I haveconsideredsec-ondary sources, I mostly relied upon Arabic texts of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s works. This was to avoid the possibility ofdistortions in translation.

Thefirst chaptercoversthe life of Al-Ghazzaliyy.Therethe primary interestis to presentthe sociopoliticalcontextwhich explains his intellectual movement. The politicalsceneat the time and the role he played in shaping it iscovered. His relationship with the existing schools ofthought, andhis position regardingmajor eventsare alsodiscussed.In addition, his formal educationandacademiccareerand the eventsrelatedto them are investigated.

The next five chapters survey the books that werewritten during the correspondingstagesof the five periodsin Al-Ghazzaliyy’s life accordingto Maurice Bouyges’ divi-sion7which I haveadopted.Thefirst of thesestagesbeginswith his life asa student;the secondcoversthefirst periodof public teachingat the Nizamiyyaii of Baghdad;the thirddeals with his years of seclusion and withdrawal frompublic teachingat theNizamiyyahof Nishapur,andthe fifthreflectsthe last stagein Al-Ghazzãliyy’slife afterhis secondwithdrawal from public teaching.

Thus, in the secondchapter I study the works thatwere written whenAl-Ghazzaliyywas a studentduring theyears465-478A.H./ 1072-1085CE. I beginby outlining hissourcesof knowledge in order to define his epistemologyduring this period, a processwhich will be repeatedineachof the following chaptersin an attempt to trace thedevelopmentin his epistemology.

The third chaptercoversAl-Ghazzãliyy’sworks duringhis first period of public teachingat the Nlzamiyyah ofBaghdadwhich extendedfrom 478A.H./ 1085 C.E. till 488A.H./ 1095 C.E. In this chapter I discusshis systematicin-quiry in questof trueknowledge.In addition,his encounterwith the different schoolsof thought including the philo-sopherswill be investigated.Finally, I explorethe influenceof Sufism on his epistemologyand how it led to his with-drawal from public life.

6 Taj Ad-Din A1-Subklyy, Tabaqatal-Shafi tyyo.hal-Kubra (Cairo: ‘Isa al-Babi al-I-Ialabi & Co., 1964).

7 Badawi, Mu’aUafat, pp. xv-xvui.

xi

INTRODUCTION

Thefourth chaptercoversthe workswritten during hisyears of seclusion from 488 A.H./1095 C.E. till 499A.H./1106 C.E. In this chapter 1 shall discussthe influence ofSufism on his epistemology.Of especialimportanceis hisintroductionof afacultyhigherthanreason(rnatakahfawqaat-’aqt) asa sourceof knowledge.I shall defInethe natureofthe relationshipbetweenthis new faculty andprophecy.

Thefifth chapterdealswith thebooksthatwerewrittenduring the secondperiodof public teachingat theNizamly-yah of Nishapur(499—503A.H./1 108—i110 C.E.).

The sixth chapterdiscussesthe laststagein Al-Ghaz-zàiiyy’s life (505A.H./ 1111C.E.).Thischapterquestionstheêlaim that he abandonedSufism for the method of thetraditionalists.

Dr. MustafaAbu-Sway

xii

Chapter ONE

THE LIFE OF AL-GHAZZALLYY’

In this chapter I shall presenta sketch of A1-Ghazzãliyy’slife (450—505A.H.2 1058—1111 C.E.) as an aid to under-standingthe complexitiesand the controversiesthat sur-round this great Muslim thinker. Not only his writings(e.g.,A1-Ghazzãliyy’sbookson knowledge)but also his lifeis a direct manifestation of his spiritual and intellectualdevelopment.This is especiallytrue when the personis aSufi (Sufiyy)3, amuslim mystic, whoseeverydaylife reflectsthe conditionshe enduresto acquirehigherlevel of under-standing.

In this sketch I begin with the historical conditions

1 In Arabic grammer.every attributed name (At-Nasab)should have astressedYa’ suffixed. For more detailssee Abd Al-Ghanlyy A1-Duqr.Lexicon of Arabic Grammer, (Mujwn Qawaid aL-Lughahal-Arabiyyah)(Damascus:Oar al-Qalam. 1986) p. 496. In quotations and biblio-graphiccitations I haveusedAI-Ghazzaliyy’snamein its original form(e.g.Algazel.). For furtherdiscussionof his nameseepage15.

2 A.H. = After I-Iijrah (themigration of prophetMuhaimnadfrom MeccatoMedina in 622 CE. (Christian Era or common Era). It was the secondCaliph, Umar al-Rhattab,whousedthis eventto mark first year(whichis lunar) of the Islamic calendar.I have chosento usetheA.H. datingbecauseit provides a senseof time that placesthe topic under dis-cussion in Its proper“Islamic context”.

3 Theword “Sufi’ is derivedfrom Arabic suf(wool). Dressingwool, amongthe Sufis, becamea symbol of detachmentfrom wordly pleasuresandaffairs- For furtherdiscussionof “Sufism’, seeIbnTaymiyyah,AL-FurqartBayrr AwUga’At-RahrnanWa AwUya’Al-Shaytan(Beirut: A1-Maktabal-Islamiyy, 1981) p. 42. In addition, therewere thosewho maintainedthat the word “Sufi’ is derived from Greek “sophia” in an apparentattempt to show that Sufism had Its origin in Greek thought andthusdisqualil3r thenotion that it stemsfrom Islamic backgrounds.

1

AL-GHAZZALIYY

surroundingthe time of A1-Ghazzãliyy’s life, especiallythepolitical setting. I will then move on to considerhis life,educationandacademiccareer.

1.1 THE POLITICAL SCENE

The political scene at the time of Al-Ghazzaliyy reflects adisintegrated caliphate. The provincial governors gainedconsiderablepowersthat left the‘AbbasidCaliphin Baghdadvirtually powerless.TheCaliphswho ruled during the life ofAl-GhazzaiiyywereA1-Qa’im Bi-Amrlllah (d. 467 AH./ 1074C.EJ4followed by his grandson,Al-Muqtadi Bi Amrlllah (d.487A.H./ 1094C.E.).5Al-Muqtadi Bi-Amrlllah was followedby his son the Caliph Al-Mustazhir Blllah (511 A.H./ 1117C.E.).6 It is to be noted that A1-Ghazzaliyy attendedtheceremony(bay ‘ab) inwhichAl-Mustazhirwasinaugurated.7The presenceof A1-Ghazzaliyyat this ceremony,which wasnotedby the historians,indicateshis supportof theCaliphwhich is also manifested in A1-Ghazzaliyy’s book at-Mustazhiriyyjlal-Rad ‘ala al-Batiniyyahwhich was namedafter the Caliph.

Furthermore.Baghdaditself cameunderdirect rulebywarlordswho becameknown as Sultans”. Theypresentedthemselvesas defacto rulers and restrictedthe Caliph todignitary functions (i.e. attendingceremonies).The mostimportant family of Sultanswas the Seljuks (AL-Saldjiqah)who, accordingto lbn Kathir (d. 774A.H./1372 C.E.)estab-lishedtheir reign inKhurasanIn 429A.H./ 1037C.E.8Theymoved to BaghdadIn 447 A.H./1055 C.E. underTughrulBeg, their fIrst king.9Heremainedin poweruntil hisdeathin458 A.H./ 1065 C.E. His successorwas his nephewAlpArsian who was killed In 465 A.H./1072 C.E.’° He was

4 lbn Kathir, Al-B fdaya wa a&Mhaya(Beirut: Maktabat a1-Ma~aflf,n.d.)Vol. XII, p. 110.

5 lbn Kathir. Vol. XII, p.146.6 Ibid.. p. 182.7 Ibid., p. 147.8 Ibid., p. 44.9 lbtd..p.66.

10 IbId.. p.90.11 IblcL,p. 139.

2

ThE LIFE OF AL-OHAZZALIVY

followed by his son Malik Shah (d. 485 A.H./1092 CE.).”who had to fight his own half-brother,Tutush in his questfor power.’2 After the deathof Malik Shah, the struggleforpowerwithin his family continuedbetweenhiswife Zubeidaandhis sonMahmUd (d.487A.H./ 1094 C.E.),whowasonlyfive years old at the time, on the one hand, and his sonBarkyaruq(d. 498A.H./ 1104 CE.), whowasthirteenyearsold, on the other. The armyfueledthis struggleby splittinginto two divisions;onesidedwith Barkyaruq,and theotherwith Mahmud. It shouldbe noted that the actual struggleover power was not led by the above mentioned children.but ratherby their trusteesandolderfamily members:theyincluded Zubeidaand vlzler Taj al-Mulk al—Marzubanrivalof Nizam al-Mulk. This rivalry led the supportersof Nizamal-Mulk, who wereconvincedthatTaJal-Mulk playedarolein thedeathofNizamal-Mulk. to sidewith Barkyaruq.’3Thisdisputewas resolvedon the battlefield in favour of Bark-yaruqwho remainedSultanuntil hisdeath.Hewasfollowedby hisbrother,MuhammadIbn’4 Malik Shah(d. 511 A.H./1117 C.E.) who ascendedto powerIn 498 A.H./1104 C.E.after anotherinternal struggle,this time with his nephew,Malik Shahlbn Barkyaruq,grandsonofMalik Shah,whowasfouryearsold.’5 After thedeathof Malik Shah,in 485A.H./1092 C.E., Zubeidademandedthat his sonMahmüd,whowas five years old at the time, should have the right ofappointing governors(wilagat al-’umrna~.But evenmoresignificantly, the scholars of Baghdad. including Al-Mutatabbib’6Thu MuhammadAl-HanaiIyy, issueda ruling(fatwa) stating that therewas nothing wrong in grantingthis right to the boy, in an unprecedentedmove. The onlyexceptionto this ruling came,we learn, fromAl-Ghazzaliyy,who forbadethe transfer of such powersto MahmUd Ibn

12 Ibn Kathir. Vol. XII. p. 148.13 HenrI Laoust. La PoUtlque De Gazali, (Paris: Libraftie Orlentaliste

Paul Oeuthner, 1970) p. 59.14 lbn = Arabic for son (ofi.15 lbn Kathir, Vol. XII, pp. 164—180.16 LIterally, the medical practitioner. Many Muslim scholars used to work

in areas not related to their scholarly work in order to avoid takingmoney from those In office. The scholar would acquire a title related tothis profession. It could be that Al-Mutatabbib was one of them.

3

AL-Gl-LkZZALIYY

Malik Shah. Fortunately, the Caliph, Al-Muqtadi, adoptedA1-Ghazzaliyy’s position.’7 A1-Ghazzãliyy’s fatwa was inaccordancewith the Shari’ah.

In anotherfatwa; to Ynsuf Ibn Tashafin (d. 500 A.H./1106 CE.), the Sultanof Al-Maghrib, Al-Ghazzaliyyencou-raged this Sultan to unite the divided principalities, bydismissingtheir kings (MuIUk al-Tawa’~flunderhis rule.’8The impact of Al-Ghazzãliyy on the political scene wentbeyondissuingfatwäs,andwriting letters.Both Ibn Khallikariandlbn KhaldQnreportedthatMuhammadIbn ‘AbdallahIbnTümart, a studentof Al-Ghazzaliyy, establishedAlmohad(Al-Muwahhidunl rule in Al-Maghrib, replacing the statethat had been establishedby Ibn Tãshafin, which expe-rienced corruption after his death.’9 Thesefatwas aresignificant in showingthe role of Muslim scholars(‘tdamà’)in the political life at the time.

Theseincidents reveal that Al-Ghazzaliyy enjoyed aprestigiousposition with those in office at that time whichenabledhim to senddaring letters to the various Sultansand viziers. He remindedthem of their dutiestoward theirsubjects,andadvisedthem aboutthe affairsof the state.InThe Golden Ingot For Advising Kings (At-Ttbr al-MasbukfiNasthat al-Mulük), Al-Ghazzaliyy addressedthe SultanMuhammad Ibn Malik Shah and warned him about theinjustice that resulted from collecting excessivetaxes: heeven told him what kind of clothes he could wear andwhatkind hecouldnot.Moreover, in hisPersianletters,2°Al-Ghazzaliyy provided advice for Fakhr Al-Mulk, and

17 lbn Kathir, Vol. XII, p. 139.18 ‘Abd Al-Amir Al-Asam, Al-Faylasuf aI-Ghazzaliyy (Beirut: Dar Al-

Andalus. 1981) p. 90.19 Abu al-HassanAi-Nadawiyy, R~alal-Fikr wa al-DawajI almlslam,7th

ed. (Kuwait: Dar al-Qalam, 1985)Vol. I, p. 93.20 AI-GhazzaliyyusedArabic andFarsifor writing. His Persianworks are

few. Some of them we know through translation and secondarysources. It seems that the only major hook in Persianthat is npttranslatedis TheAl-Cherny of Happiness(Kirayay Saadafl, which isdifferent fromtheArbic (Kirn.ya al-Sa’adah),is theequivalentto Ihya’‘Ulum al-Din.Al-Nadawiyy referredto the“Persianletters” in R~alal-Fl/crWa dl-Da’wahfi al-Islam. The Arabic translationof theseletters hasbeen made availableby Dr. Nur al-Din Al-Au: P’ada’il al-Anam minRasa’tlH[4jat al-Islam.

4

ThE LIFEOFAL-GHAZZAL1YY

criticized Sultan Sanjar Ibn Malik Shah regarding thewelfareof the people.2’ Furthermore,Al-Ghazzaliyy servedseveral times as a specialenvoy between the Caliph andthe Sultan.22

In addition,Al-Ghazzaliyy,afterhis embraceof Sufismwhich could be Interpretedasawithdrawal from public lifebecauseof the prevailing corruption, did not accept anygifts from the Sultans. In the chapteron the lawful andthe forbidden (al-halEd wal-haram) in Ihyã’ ‘Urum al-Dbr,Al-Ghazzàliyy discussedextensivelythe monetaryrelation-ship betweenthe sultansand the people;he concludedbystating that during his time all the monies of the Sultanswere acquiredunlawfully and thus cannot be accepted.23Moreover,he called on peopleto distancethemselvesfromunjust Sultans, and to avoid those who befriend suchtyrants or were of assistanceto them. Al-Ghazzäliyy heldthat thesewerereligious duties(wãjib).24

1.1.1 A1-Ghazzaliyyand the Other Schoolsof Jurisprudence

In theyearTughrul BegenteredBaghdadtherewasanotherevent of significance for the life of A1-Ghazzäliyywhichshedslight upon thecircumstancesthat heendured.It wasduring this year that a disturbance took place betweenthe Asha’irites25and the Hanbalites.26As a result of thisdisturbance, the Ashairites were barred from attendingFriday ceremcinies(Al-tJuma9 and congregationalprayers(Al-Jarnaat).27

A1-Ghazzaliyyflourished In this atmosphereof intole-rancebetweenthe followers of different schoolsof theology

21 Ai-NadawIyy,Vol.1, p. 191.22 All ai-QarahDaghi, introduction, Al-Wasitfi al Mac!hhah:by Al-Ghaz-

zaliyy (Cairo: Dar al-Islah, nd.) Vol. I. p. 78.23 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Thya’,Vol. II, pp. 135—152.24 Al-Nadawiyy. Vol. 1, pp. 189—193.25 The Ashairitesare theologianswho belong to the schoolof Abu Al-

HasanAl-Ashariyy (d. 324 A.H./935 CE.).26 TheHanbalitesarejurisprudents(fuqaha’) whobelongto the schoolof

Ahmad lbn 1-lanbal (d. 241 A.H./855 cE.).27 Ibn Kathir, Vol. XII, p. 66.

5

AL-GHAZZALIYY

andjurisprudencewithin theSunnitetradition.28Hehimselfwas consideredanAshairite29and a doctorof the Shaffite(Shafiiyyah)3°school ofjurisprudence.Out of his concern.he tried to curb this attitude of intolerancethrough hiswritings. In TheRevivalOfTheIslamicSciences(Ihy&’ iliumal-Din), Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote with great reverenceaboutthe most prominentdoctorsofjurisprudence:“Al-Shafi’iyy,Màlik, Abmad Ibn Hanbal, Abü Hanlfah.3’ and Sufian Al-Thawriyy.’32 The order in which he arrangedtheir nameswas notchronological:ratherAl-Ghazzaliyy arrangedthemaccordingto the numberof their adherentsduring his owntime.33 Moreover, Al-Ghazzaliyy wanted to emphasizethelove and respectthat thesescholarshad for each other;and he wantedthe jurists of his time to follow suit. Notonly did Al-Ghazzàliyy endorsea policy of toleranceandopennesstowards other schoolsof jurisprudence,he alsogavepriority to someof theirrulingsoverthoseofal-Shafiiyy.For example, he cited numerous rulings of Ahmad IbnHanbal.3 In addition,heacceptedthe ruling ofAbu Hanifah,agreeingthat Al-Shafi’iyy’s position in the case of divorcehada touch of exaggeration(takallujl.35 -

Al-Ghazzaliyyalso praisedAbü Hanifah for refusingtoacceptagovernmentaloffice that couldhavemadehim res-ponsiblefor all the moneyof the Caliphate.This refusalledtheSultantowhip Abu Hanlfahtwenty timesin public.This

28 The scholarswho foundedtheseschoolsneverdisplayedthis sort ofintolerance.Infact, theywere in manycasesteachersof oneanother:Malik Ibn Anas (d. 179 A.H./795 CE.), fdunder of the Malikite(Malik(yyah) schoolof jurisprudencetaughtAl-Shafiiyy who in turntaught Ibn Hanbal.

29 For adiscussionofwhetherA1-GhazzaliyywasindeedanAsha’irite,seep. 55.

30 TheShafliteschoolwasfoundedby Muhammadlbn Idris A1-Shafliyy(d 204 A.H./819 CE.)

31 Abu Hanifah, Al-Numan lbn Thabit (d. 150 A.H./7647CE.) foundedthe Hanafite school of jurisprudence.It is known as the schoolofpersonalopinion (ray). His student,AbuYusuf(d. 182 A.H./799CE.).wasa major contributor to this school.

32 Ai-Thawriyy, Sufian Ibn Said lbn Masruq (d. 162 A.H./778 c.E.).Unlike the other schools, his school of law does not exist anymore.

33 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Ihya’ ‘Ulurn al-Din (Beirut: Dar al-Marifah, n.d.) Vol. I,p. 24.

34 Al-Qarah Daghi,Vol. I. p.163.35 Ibid., Vol.1, p.162.

6

THE LIFE OF AL-GHAZZALIYY

praise absolves A1-Ghazzãliyyof the charge that he dis-gracedAbu Hanifahwithoutjustification. NowAl-Ghazzàliyyhad been accusedof disgracing Abu Hanifah by SultanSanjar.Theseaccusationswerecertainlyincompatiblewiththe position A1-Ghazzãliyyasstatedabove;furthermore,hecategorically denied such accusations.In fact, they werebased upon insults found in copies of Al-Ghazzaliyy’sA1-Mankhülmitt Taliqàtal-Usid. However,theseinsults wereforgeries, inserted into his book when it was copied.36Furthermore,wheneverhe mentionedAbü Hanifah’s namein the abovebook, Al—Ghazzaliyyaddeda supplication(i.e.may Allah be pleasedwith him) following his name. Thissupplicationwas a clear sign of the respectAl-Ghazzãliyyhad for Abü Hanifah.37

Al-Ghazzaliyysawthathiscontemporariesbusiedthem-selves studying aspectsof jurisprudencethat might neverbe neededduring their lifetimes, and preoccupyingthem-selveswith the differencesbetweenthe various schoolsofjurisprudence.According to A1-Ghazzaliyy,the followers ofthe different schoolsofjurisprudencewho did such thingswereunjust tothefounders.Instead,Al-Ghazzàliyysuggest-ed that theyoughtto studymedicinein orderto be useful.38

1.1.2 A1-Ghazzãliyyand the Sectsof the Time

The relationship between the Sunnites and the Shi’ites,3°especially the Rawàfld who lived in the Karakh district of

36 Thesewerenot only exampleof forgeriesof Ai-Ghazzaliyy’s work. Al-Ghazzaliyy copiesof Al-Munqfdh mm al-Dalal and Mishkat aI-Anwarweresubmittedto him for approval(Ijazah).He reportedtheIncidenttothehead(mis) of Khurasanwhoimprisoned,andlateron deportedthepersonresponsible.

37 Al-Qarah Daghi, Vol. 1, pp. 159—163.38 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’, Vol. 1, pp. 24—28.39 ShIltes (shi’ah), Arabic for “supportersof”. is a generalclassification

that Includesall thedifferent sectsthathaveapositiontoward ‘Mi lbnAbu Talib, the fourth Caliph and cousin of prophet Muhammad,different thanthat of theSunnites.Someof theShiites arguethat Mishould havebeenthefirst Caliph,othersadoptanextremepositionbyclaiming that All has divine attributes. Although Shiites startedprimarily as a political stand.theydevelopedtheirown theology andjurisprudence.

7

AL-GHAZZLIYY

Baghdad,was also contentious.Almost every year tensionused to escalateon the day of Ashura’4°which resultedin killings and destruction on both sides. The establish-ment of a strongShi’ite political statein Egyptat the handsof the Fatimids4’ in 358A.H./968 C.E.42strengthenedtheposition of the Shiites in Baghdadwho, in return, hadfor-mally acknowledgedthe Fatimid rulers in Friday ceremo-nies. This formal acknowledgedalso spread to Damascus,MedinaandMecca.43Accordingto IbnAl-Athir’sAl-Kämil, thefirst reconciliation (suTh), between the Sunnites and theShi’ites, took placein 502 A.H./ 1108 C.E.~

A1-Ghazzaliyywas the target of claims that he was aShl’ite. Sibt lbn A1-Jawziyy claimed, in Riyäd al-AjhâmftManliqib A1tl al-Bayt, that Al-Ghazzàliyywasa Shi’ite for awhile, but later on changedhis position. According to Dr.Abmad Al-Shirbasiyy, who seemedto be in favour of Al-Ghazzaliyy’sShiism, the Shiltes consideredAl-Ghazzallyyoneof their teachersknowing thathewasaSunnite.Healsoaddedthat theShiltesbelievedAl-GhazzaliyysyroteRiSàIQI-tEl IsmAllah al-A Eamor SharhJannatal-Asmà’, abook thatpraised ‘All Ibn Abu Talib. Apparently, this book was notwritten by A1-Ghazzâliyy.45In addition, praising and loving

40 Every year, on the 10th of Muharram, thefirst Arabic month of thelunar year. the Shiltes commemoratethe martyrdomof Al-HussaynIbn ‘All, grandsonof prophetMuhammad,and son of ‘All, the fourthCaliph. The Shi’Ites commemoratethis event by virtually torturingthemselves,sincetheybelievethat theShi’ites of IraqhadbetrayedAl-Hussaynwhenhewent to Iraq,after theyhavepromisedhim supportin his questfor power.

41 This nameis attributed to Fatima, daughterof prophet Muhammad,andwife of ‘All IbmAbu Talib. In 402 A.H./101 1 CE., thescholarsofBaghdadstatedthat thefounderof theFatlmldswas ubayd Ibm SadAl-Janniyy and that he did not descendfrom thechildren of ‘Mi andFatima. For further details,seeIbn Kathir, Vol. XI, p. 344.

42 Ibn Kathlr, Vol. XI, p.266.43 Friday prayer (AI-,Jumu’ah) is composed basically of two short

speeches(khutab) andtwo actsof prostration (raka’ali). Theacknow-ledgementmentioned abovetakesthe form of a supplication (dualfor thesake of theruler (i.e. askingAllah to guidehim) which usuallytakesplaceat theendof thesecondspeechbeforetheperformanceofthe two prostrations.This du‘a’ for the ruler becamea symbol ofalliance.

44 Al-Qarah Daghi, Vol. 1, p.49.45 AhmadAl-Sharbaslyy,Al-Ghazoliyy. (Beirut: Dar al-JIl, 1975)p. 13.

8


‘Ali is not restrictedto the Shi’ites: the Sunnites’booksarcfull of suchnotions.

Furthermore,to refute theseaccusations46one couldcite A1-Ghazzãliyy’sfatwà againstthe cursing of Yazid IbnMu’àwiyah,who wastheCaliphat Damascus(reigned61-63A.H./680-683 C.E,). The Shrites consideredYazid theirarch enemy, thinking that he was responsible for thedeathof Al-Hussayn Ibn ‘All,47 and thus they curse him.It is not possiblethat someoneaffIliated with Shi’ism inany fashion could issue this fatwb.45 Yet, A1-Shirbasiyymaintainedthat this fatwà was not enoughto acquit Al-Ghazzãliyy from the allegationsthat he was a Shilte. Al-Shirbasiyy contended that Al-Ghazzãliyy favoured ‘All’sopinionoverthatof Ibn ‘Abbas, in a ruling in jurisprudence;Al-Shirbasiyy thought that Al-Ghazzàliyy had personalpreferencefor Ali.49 It is obviousthat this is a caseof anAdhomlaemargument.

The abovefatwa could be considereda proof that Al-GhazzaliyywasnotaShiite butwhatif heissuedthis rulingwhen he was not a Shiite? The answershould emphasisthefact that sofar thereis nothingto substantiatetheclaimthat Al-Ghazzãliyy was ever a Shilte. In fact I could notapprehendwhy this claim wasstarted.

The sect (ftrqah) that propagatedthe cause of theFatimids becameknown as the Batinites (Al-Batirttyyah).5°Al-Ghazzãliyy listed the namesby which they were some-timesknownastheQaramltah,theQarmatiyyah,the Khur-

46 Theyareconsidered“accusations”becauseSunniteshavea tendencyto think of Shilsmasa tradition which involvespositionsthat arenotin accordancewith Islamic Sharl’ah.

47 Seefootnote # 54.48 Badawl, pp. 47—49.49 Al-Sharbasiyy,pp.13-is.50 The Batinites are a sect that, among other things, believed in an

infallible Imain. Heis, supposedly,theonly onewhocouldInterprettheSharlah (Islamic teachings)and find the esoteric (batmnand henceBatiniyyah) exegesis.They are known by many nicknames whichresulted from their internal conflicts and divisions. In addition to thenicknames listed by A1-Ghazzaliyy, otherswere: A1-Fatlmiyyah, Al-Hashashum,A1-Baharah,andA1-kgha Khaniyyah. For moredetails,seeAl-NadwahAl—’Alamiyyah Lish-ShababAl-Islamiyy, Al-Mawsu’ahal-Muyassarnhflai-Adyanwaol-Madhahibal-Mu’asfruh(Rlyad:Matha’atSafir. 1989) pp. 45-52, 395-398.

9

AL-GHAZZALIYY

ramites,the Khurramadinites,the Ismailies, the Seveners,the Babikites, the Muhammirah,andthe Talimites.5’ Eachof thesenamesemphasizedcertainaspectsof this sect: thefoundersof the different factions,their beliefs,and,in somecases,the time and place in which they were active.52TheBatinites poseda threat to the Caliphateandto the Sunnicreed. In addition, they had resortedto political assassina-tion.~3Amongthosewhowerekilled at their handswasNizãmAl-Mu1k54 (d. 485A.H./ 1092 C.E.),55thevizier for Alp Arslanand Malik Shah. He establishedthe famous Nizâmiyyahcolleges56which were namedafter him, and assignedAl-Ghazzãliyy to head the Nizãmiyyah at Baghdad.57FakhrAl-Mulk, son of Nizam Al-Mulk and vizier for Sanjar inNishapur.met thesamefateashis fatherin 500A.M.! 1106C.E.58Among the many otherdignitarieswho weresystem-atically assassinatedwas Abü A1-Qasim59who was killedin Nishapur,wherehewasapreacher(khatib), in 492 A.H./1098 C.E.°°He was the son of Imam Al-Haramayn Al-Juwainiyy who was the educator par excellenceat thetime, head of the Nizãmiyyah college at Nishapur, andteacherof Al-Ghazzäliyy. These assassinationshave led

51 Al-Ghazzaliyy, “Fada’(h aI-Batiniyyah wa-Fada’U al-Mustazhiriyyah,”&eedo,nand fl4fihlment,ed andtrans. RichardJ. McCarthy (Boston:TwaynePublishers, 19801 p.181.

52 The lsma’ilieswereBatiniteswho claimedto be followersof Isma’il IbnJa’far Al-Sadiq, the Khurramltesfrom Khurram, Farsi for pleasure,advocatedhedonism, and the Qaramitah.followers of Qurmut IbnAl-Asg’ath, establishedtheir rule In Al-Bahrayn towards the end ofthethird centuryA.H.

53 The English word assassin”is derivedfrom “Assassin’, the Ismailisect, from Arabic hashashin,hashish-eaters.See TheNew LexiconWebster’sD(ctior-tary Of The English Language (New York: LexiconPublications,Inc., 1989).

54 His namewasAl-Hasan Ibn ‘Mi Ibn Ishaq,Abu-All. Hewas born in‘flis, thesamebirth placeof Al-Ghazzaliyy. in 408A.H.f 1017 C.E.

55 Ibn Kathir, Vol. XII, p.139.§6 NizamAl-Mulk built acollegein eachcity in IraqandKhurasan.Those

included Baghdad, Balakh, Nishapur, Harat, Asfahan, Al-Basrab,Many, Tubristan andAl-Misl, Al-Subkiyy, Vol. IV, p. 314.

57 Taj Al-Din Al-Subkiyr, TabaqataI-Shqfiiyyah aI-Kubra (Cairo: ‘IsaAl-Babi Al-Halabi & Co., 1964)vol. VI, p. 197.

58 lbn Kathir, vol. XII. p. 167.59 Abu Al-Qasim Ibn ‘Abd Al-Malik (Imam Al-Haramain) Ibn ‘Abd Allah

(Al-Shaikh Abu Muhammad)Ibn Yusuf60 lbn Kathir, vol. XII, p. 157.

10


someMuslim and orientalist scholarsto doubtAI-Ghazzä-liyy’s accountof why he left his position at the Nizàmiyyahcollegein Baghdad.61

The activities of the BatinitespromptedAl-Ghazzãliyyto devoteat leastsevenbooksandtreatisestowhatappearsto be a systematicconfrontation of their positions duringvarious stagesof his life.62

It is understandablethat, in this seaof turmoil, strug-gle, and intolerance,one might not expectany group to bespared.Yet, Watt, an orientalist, said that ChristiansandJewshad internal autonomyundertheir heads.He addedthat “there was practically no religious persecution”;theyenjoyedofficial protectionfrom the Islamic Caliphateuntilits breakdownat the turn of the century.63The presenceof ChristiansandJewsin Khurãsãn,during the earlylife ofA1-Ghazzaliyy,enticedhim to ask questionscrucial for hisquest for knowledge•64 In the Deliverancefrom Error, Al-Ghazzãliyysaid:

The thirst for grasping the real meaning of things wasindeedmy habit andwont from my early yearsandin theprimeof my life. Itwas an instinctive, natural disposition

61 See page 142.62 These books are: 1. At-Mustazhiriyyfi al-Rad ‘ala al-Batiniyyah. also

known as Fada’th al-Batiniyyah wa-Dada’ll al-MustazhiriyyalL Al-Ghazzaliyywrote it in support of the ‘Abbasid Caliph Al-Mustazhir (d.512 A.H./1118 CE.) against the Batiniyyah. 2. Hujjat al-Haq. waswritten in Baghdadbut has been lost. Also, both of Qwasim at-BatiniyyahandAl-Darj al-Marqurn bi al-Jadawüwhichwaswritten inTus, arelost,For moredetailsseeBadawi,Muauafatat-Ghnzal4pp.85—86 & p. 159. 3. Qawasimal-Batiniyyah. 4. Jawabal-Masa’ll at-Arbaallati Sa’alahaat-Batiniyyah b&Hamadhan,Al-Ghazzaliyy, “Al-Mama?vol. 11 (1908) pp. 601-608. 5. AI-Dai~ai-Marqum bi al-Jadawil,6. Fatsal ai-Tafriqah baa-i al-Islam wa al-Zandaqah.7. Al-Qistas at-Mustaqirn, and the section on AhI ol-Ta’lim in At-Munqidh ruin at-Dalal which is a critique of their methodology. A1-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munc

1idh ruin al-Dalal which Is a critique of their methodology. Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh ruin al-Dalal, eds, Jamfl Saliba and Kamil‘Aiyyad, 10th ed. (No. city: Dar al-Andalus, 1981) pp. 117—129. Theabovementionedbooksarelisted In chronologicalorderastheyappearin Badawi’sMu’allafatAl-Ghazali

63 w. Montgomery Watt, Muslim IntellectuaL’ A Study of al-Ghazzatt(Edinburgh:The EdinburghUniversity Press,1963)p. 8.

64 Al-Ohazzaliyy. DeliverancefromEnon JarnilSalibaandKamil Ayyad,eds,(No.City: DarAl-Andalus, 1981), p. 81.

11

AL-GHAZZALIYY

placedin my makeupby Allah Most High, notsomethingdue to my own choosingand contriving.As aresult, thefettersof servileconformism(taqlid) fell awayfrom me,and inheritedbeliefslost their hold on me,whenI wasquite young.For I saw that the children of Christiansalwaysgrewup embracingChristianity, and the chil-drenof Jewsalwaysgrewup adheringtoJudaism,andthe children of Muslims alwaysgrew up following thereligion of (slam, I alsoheard thetraditionrelatedfromthe Messengerof Allah - May Allah’s blessingandpeacebe upon him - in which he said: “Every infant is bornendowedwith the fitra:65 thenhisparentsmakehim Jewor Christianor Magian.”66ConsequentlyI felt an innerurgeto seekthe true meaningof the originalfltra, andthe true meaningof thebeliefsarising throughslavishaping of parents,the beginningsof which are sugges-tionsimposedfrom without, sincetherearedifferencesof opinion in the discernmentof thosethatare false.°7

This mode of questioning and quest for knowledgecontinuedwith A1-Ghazzãliyyuntil the endof his life.

1.1.3 The Crusades

In addition to the internal conflicts and turmoil, the Is-lamic Caliphatesufferedfrom the invasionsof the Crusa-derswho wereknownin medievalsourcesastheFranks(Al-Firanj/al-flrarijal4. They conqueredJerusalem,the thirdholy Muslim site,~in 492 A.H./ 1098 C.E.69A1-Ghazzaliyy

65 Literally, Jitra means natural disposition. In the above mentionedhadith it meansthat all peoplearebornas Muslims. andhenceIslamis thereligion of frtra.

66 This is a part of a hndtthnarratedby Al-Bukharlyy in his Sahih.Theword Magian (Majusiyy) means fire-worshipper. This religion wasspreadin Persia,In Islamic Shari’ah,maglansweretoleratedbasedonthe assumptionthat they could have deviated from a people whoreceived a book (i.e. through revelation) (shubhatkitab) and thusentitled to this tolerancewhich isa right for thepeopleof thebook (alital-kitab), JewsandChristians.

67 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Freedomand fl4flllrnent (Al-Munqidh ruin al-DalaQ,trans. RichardJosephMcCarthy, S. J. (Boston: TwaynePublishers,1980) p. 63.

68 Here I refer to the hadith of prophetMuhammadin which heallowedmuslims to travel to visit three mosques only: Bayt Allah Al-Haram InMakkah the mosque of the prophet in Medina, and Al-Aqsa mosqueinJerusalem.

69 Ibn Kathir, Vol. XII, p. 156.

12


neither mentionedthe Crusadersin his writings nor madeclearhis positionregardingthem, andthis hasprovedto beproblematicfor him. Sincethe turn of this century,Muslimscholarshave criticized his stand and have consideredituncharacteristicof a man of the statureof A1-Ghazzãliyy.In his doctoral dissertation, Dr. Zaki Mubarak blamedA1-Ghazzaliyy’s Sufism for the absenceof any role that hecould haveplayedin calling for Jihad:

“A1-CIhazzãliyyhadsunkinto his retreat(khalwah) , andwas preoccupiedwith his recitations (awrad) not knowinghis duty to call for Jihad.”7°

In Abu-Hãmid Al-Ghazzaliyy wa al-Tasawwuf, AbdAl-Rahmãn Dimashqiyyah also blames Al-Ghazzàliyy’sSufism.This study lists the position of most contemporaryMuslim thinkers.71It seemsthat theonly scholarwho triedto explainAl-Ghazzãliyy’s position in light of Sufism,with-out blaminghim for it, was Dr. Yusuf Ai-Qardawiyy:72

“It couldbethat theexcuseof thishonorableImamwashis preoccupationprimarily with reformation from within,and that internal corruption is responsiblefor paving (theway) for foreigninvasion.”73

Dr. Al-Qardawiyy acknowledged, however, that Al-Ghazzaliyy’s position was “puzzling”, especially since Al-Ghazzaliyywroteaboutjihàd in hisbooksofjurlsprudence.Dr. Al-Qardawiyy endedhis discussionof this issue, bystating“that only Allah knows the reality of his excuse”74

It is a fact, however,thatAl-Ghazzaliyydid not includeachapteronjihãd in his major Ihyã’ ‘UIüm al-Din, which heusedto teachafter returning to Baghdadfrom his travels,75

70 Zaki Mubarak, Al-Akhlaq mdAl-Chazzollyy (Beirut: Al-Maktabah Al-‘Asriyyah. nd.) p. 17. This doctoraldissertationwasdefendedat theEgyptianUniversity on May, 15, 1924. The prefaceof thepublisher.and the introduction of the author, indicate that this dissertationstirred awaveof criticism at thetime.

71 ‘Abd Al-Rahman Dimashqiyyah, Abu Hamld Al-Ghazzaliyy Wa at-Tasawwuf(Rlyad:DarTibah, 1988) pp. 349—356.

72 A1-Qardawiyy.Yusuf Abdulllah (1926-?). Deanof the college of Sha-rl’ah and Islamic Studiesat the University of Qatar.he is one of themostrenownedjurists of theIslamic world today.

73 YusufaI-Qardawlyy,Al-ImamAl-GhazzaUyyBaynMadthihWaNaqidth(Ai-Mansurah:Dam al-Wafa’. 1988)pp. 172—174.

74 Ai-Qardawiyy, p. 174.75 A1-Subkiyy, vol. vi, p. 200.

13

AL-GFIAZZALIYY

which included Jerusalemjust before the Crusadersreachedit. In addition,he choseto continuethe solitary lifefor abouttenyears afterJerusalemwascaptured.

In my opinion, however, Al-Ghazzãliyy’s silence onthis mattercanbe seenin a different light. This requiresamore careful understandingof the meaningofjihad. Theliteral meaningof jihdd is “effort”, “striving’ or “struggle”.The translation ofjihãd as “holy war” is incorrect; there isno equivalentuse In Arabic language.76In the Qur’an andthe Sunnah,jihàd is understood to havemore than onemeaning. One meaningdenotesfighting (qitaU. The othermeaning,which is overlookedby many, is the ethical andmoral jil-ziwi. However, in jurisprudence,all four schools77definedthe meaningofjihãd asfighting.78

In what might expressone of his views toward jthàd,Al-GhazzãliyyquotedAbüA1-Darda’,oneof the companionsof prophetMuhammadIS.A.A.S1.79whosaid:“He whothinksthat seekingknowledge is notjihäd, has a defect in hisopinion and reason”.8°Moreover, in Kifab Al-Aclhkãrwa-Al-Daawãt (the “Book of Remembranceand Supplication” inThe Revival of Islamic Sciences,A1-Ghazzãliyy cited twotraditions of prophet Muhammad [S.A.A.S.1 that elevatedthe reward for the performanceof dhikr (remembrance)tothe level of jihbd or even better8’ In addition, Ibn Kathirnarratesthat the peopleof Baghdadwere indifferent to the

76 Bernard Lewis, ThePoliticalLanguageof Islam(Chicago:The Universityof ChicagoPress,1988)pp. 70—75.

77 The Hanifite, theMalikite, theShaflite andthe 1-lanbalite.78 ‘Abdallah ‘Azzam. ft al-Jihad Ado.bwa-Ahkam (No City: Matbu’at al-

Jihad, 1987)pp. 2—3.79 Short for SatlaAllahu ‘Atayht WaSatlam(May Allah’s peacebe upon

him).80 Al-Ghazzaiiyy. Ihya’. p. 9.81 The first tradition, which startswith ‘Ma ‘Ama! Jim Adamruin ‘Amal

Anja Lahu ruin ‘AdhabAllah ruinDhlkr Allah ‘Azza wa’JalL.. etc.,’ hadbeennarratedby Mu’adh Ibn Abu Jabal. Ibn Ahu Shaybahand At-Tabaraniyyverifiedthis tradition andsaidthat it hasa‘good’ chainofnarrators (Lsnaduhuhasan).The secondtradItion, which startswith“Ala unbi’akum Si Rhayrl A’malakum wa-Azkaha ... etc.’ had beennarratedby Abu Al-Darda’, Al-Tirmidhiyy. Al-Hakim and lbn majahverified this tradition and said that It has a “sound” chain of narra-tors (tsnaduhusahih), SeeAi-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’ ilium al-Din, vol. I,p. 295.

14

THE LIFE OFAL-GHAZZALIYY

effort of jurists, including lbn ‘Aqi182 who tried to mobilizethem.83Al-Ghazzàliyy must havebeen awareof what wasgoing aroundhim, andacted accordingly.

Moreover,Al-Ghazzáliyy’scorrespondencewith the au-thorities andhiscriticism of their policieswhich werenot inaccordancewith Islamic Sharfaharedirect applicationsofa tradition of prophet Muhammad [S.A.A.S.] in which hesaid: ‘The greatestJiltdd is (saying) aword of truth in frontof an unjust Sultan.”84

In my opinion, Al-Ghazzaliyy realizedthat the IslamicCaliphate at the time was corrupt and filled with socialand ideological trends that ran against Islamic Sharl’ah.I think he was convincedthat the diseasewas within thestate,and that the Crusaderswerenothing but the symp-toms. Al-Ghazzãliyy understoodthat the core of the issuewas moral. To solve this problem, he wanted to educatepeople and to revive the role of the Shari’ah ad its aims(rnaqasid).But, theperiodduringwhichAl-Ghazzàliyywith-drewfrompublic life cannotbejustifiedin the light of IslamicShari’ah.Any actthat resemblesmonasticism(rahbaniyyah)was rejectedby the Qur’an and the Sunnah.85The Qur’anconsideredmonasticism an innovation (bid’ah) that wasnot requiredfrom the monks(Suraal-Hadid 57:27).

1,2 HIS EARLY LIFE

His full namewas Muhammad Ibn Muhammadtim Mu-

82 ‘Mi Ibn ‘Aqil Ibn Muhammad(431 A.H./1039—513 A.1-1./1119 C.E.).He was the head of the Hanbalites at Baghdad and a contemporaryof Al-Ohazzaliyy. He was anotherexception to theprevailing tenserelations betweenthe different schoolsof jurisprudence.Ibn Kathir,vol. XII. p. 184.

83 Ibn Kathir, vol. XII. p. 156.84 “bina A‘zamaal-Jihad KalimataHaqqin indaSultaninJa’V.85 In theQur’an, thereareversesthat praisesChristian monksfor their

humblenessand acceptenceof Allah’s revelation(al-Qur’an. Suraat-Ma’idah 5:82); yet thereare alsoversethat criticize manyof them inrelationship to financial affairs (ai-Qur’an, Sura al-Taubah9:34). Inthe Sunnah, prophet Muhammad prohibited ‘Uthman Ibn Maz’unfrom monasticism sayingto him, ‘Oh ‘Uthman, monasticismis notrequiredfrom us; amI not anexamplefor you?’ Thishadith hasbeennarratedby AhmadIbn Hanbal in hisMusnad,6: 226.

15

AL-CHAZZALIYY

hammad Ibn Ahmad al-Tüsiyy (the Tusite), AbU Hãmid,86A1-Ghazzãliyy. He bore the title of respectHujjat Al-Islam(proof of Islam) for the role he played in defendingIslamagainstthe trendsof thought that existedat the time.57Hewasborn in Tus in 450 A.H./1058 C.E. Tus was a city ofKhurasannear Meshhadin Iran today. It was composedof two adjacent towns: Nuqan and Tabarãn. His fatherwas a wool spinner (ghazzhO88and thus, relative to thisprofession,A1-Ghazzãliyyacquiredthisnamewith astressed“z”. Many medievalscholarsacceptedthis form of Al-Ghaz-zaliyy’s name.89Thosewho say that the correctform is “Al-Ghazaliyy” with unstressed“z” basetheir judgementon theideathat “AI-Ghazaliyy” is derivedfrom theword Ghazalah,supposedly,oneof the villages that surroundTus. In thiscase,“Al-Ghazàliyy” would meanthe Ghazallte. However,accordingto Ibn Al-Sam’aniyy (d. 506 A,H./112 C.E.),9°acontemporaryof A1-Ghazzaliyy, the people of Tus deniedthe existence of the village of Ghazalahwhen he askedthemaboutit.91 Among thosewhowerealsocalled“A1-Ghaz-zaliyy”°2were his brotherAhmad (d. 520 A.H./1126 C.E.),and the brotherof A1-Ghazzaliyy’sgrandfather,Ahmad IbnMuhammad (d. 435 A,H./1043) CE.). The latter also hadAbu I-lamid as an honorific title. He was a scholar andteacherof Abü ‘All Al-Fadl Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘All Al-Faramdhiyy (d. 477 A.H./1048 C.E.). A1-Faramdhiyyplayeda major role in shapingAl-Ghazzaliyy’s Sufism.93

86 This is an honorific title (kunyah). Many Shafl’ite scholarsheldthiskunyah. which literally means“father of Hamid.” Al-Ghazzaliyy didnot have any sons.MurtadaA1-Zubaydiyy, Ithaf al-Sadahal-Mutaqlnbt-Shnrh Asrar Ihya’ ilium al-Din, (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ Al-Turath al-‘Arablyy) Vol. 1. p. 18.

87 Taj Al-Din AI-Subkiyy, Tabaqatal-Shafi’iyyah al-Kubra, ‘Abd A1-FattahMuhammad AI-Hilw and Mahmud Muhammad al-Tanahiyy. eds,,(Cairo: Matba’at ‘Isa al-Babi ai-Halabi & Co.. 1968). Vol. VI, p. 191.

88 Al-Subkiyy. Vol. VI, p. 193.89 They include Al-Nawawiyy, Ibn Al-Athir. Al-Dhahabiyy. and Ibn

Khallikan. Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Al-Husayniyy Murtada Al-Zubaydlyy. IthafAl-Sadahal-Muttaqinbi-SharhAsrarlhya’ ‘IJiwnal-Din(Beirut: Dar Ihya’ Al-Turath al-’Arabiyy. n.d.) p. 18.

90 Ibn Kathir, vol. XII, p. 174,91 Ibn Al-Sam’aniyy. TheGenealogies(Al-ansab):Al-Zubaydlyy. p. 18.92 In this dissertation,I refer to MuhammadasAl-Ghazzaliyy,andto his

brotherAhmad,by his first name, asa metterof convenience.93 M-Subkiyy. Vol. VI, p 209.

16

ThE LIFE OFAL-OHAZZALIYY

Although Al-Ghazzàliyy was born in Tus, which isrightly considerednon-Arabic land, therewerevoicesadvo-cating the possibility that Al-Ghazzaliyy was of Arabicorigin.94 Whether Al-Ghazzaliyy was an Arab or not doesnot makemuch difference. lbn Rhaldun(d. 809A.H./ 1406C.E.) stated “that most Muslim scholarswere not Arabs,andinsomefields all ofthemwere ‘Ajam(non-Arabs).95Suchscholars used Arabic In their writings because it waslinguafrancaof their world.

Beforehis death,Al-Ghazzãliyy’s father entrustedhimand his brotherAhmad to a Sufi friend. He askedhim tospendwhateverlittle money he left behind, to teach themreadingandwriting. WhenthemoneywasfInished, theSufiaskedthemto join a schoolasstudentssothat they mightsubsist.°6According to Al-Subklyy, schoolsusedto provideroom, boardanda stipend.97

1.3 HIS EDUCATION AND ACADEMIC CAREER

1.3,1 Formal Education

As mentioned above, Al-Ghazzallyy and his brotherAhmad, learnedto readandwrite at the handof their Sufitrustee. Although no dates are available about Al-Ghazzàliyy’searlyeducation,thenormal ageto beginschoolwas eleven.98Al-Ghazzallyywas eleven in 469 A.H./ 1069C.E. It couldbe during this time that he beganhis studyofjurisprudence at Tus where his teacherwas AI~madlbnMuhammadAl-Radhakaniyy. Al-Ghazzàliyy’s next stationwas Jurjãn where he wrote Al-Ta’liqah from the lecturesof Abü Al-Qasim Al-Isma’iliyy Al-Juijãniyy.99 On his way

94 Al-Zubaydiyy,Vol. I, p. 18 andAl-Sharbasiyy,p. 21.95 Ibn Khaldun. Al-Muqaddimah.(Beirut: Dar al-Qalazm.1984), p. 543.96 Al-Subklyy, Vol. VI, pp. 193—194.97 A1-QarahDaghi.Vol.1. p. 69.~s watt, MuslimIntellectual, p.21.99 According to As-Subkiyy, Vol. VI, p. 195, Al-Ghazzallyy’steacherin

Jurjan was Abu Nasr Al-Isma’lIiyy. His full name was MuhammadIbn Ahmad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Ismail (d. 405 A.H./1014 CE.) Theactual teacher full namewas Isma’il Ibn Mas’adahIbn Iajns’il IbnAbmadIbn Ibrahim Ibn Isma’il (d. 477A.H./ 1084CE.). It is obvious

17

AL-Cl IAZZALIYY

back to Tus, his belongings including A1-Ta’iiqah werestolen by bandits. Al-Ghazzãliyy followed them andappealedto their commanderto return him the books forwhichhe had “travelled in orderto listen, to write and knowtheir contents”.’°°Thecommanderlaughedat Al-Ghazzaliyybecausehe claimed to know the contentsof the books, yethe was stripedof the knowledgethe momentthey took thebooks from him. Al-Ghazzàliyy took back his books anddecidedto memorizethem,sohecould neverbe deprivedofhis knowledge again. Al-Ghazzãliyy’s journey to Jurjãnmust have occurredbefore 474 A.H./1074 CE., since hespent threeyearsin Tus memorizingthebookshe broughtbackwith him before leaving to Nishapur.’°’In 470 A.H./1077C.E.,Al-Ghazzãliyywentto Nishapur,wherehestudiedat theNizamiyyah,underImamAl-Haramayn,Al-Juwainiyy.until his death in 478 A.H./1085 C.E. During his stay atthe Nizamiyyah, Al-Ghazzàliyy learnedand excelled in theShafi’iteJurisprudence,comparativejurisprudence(‘Jim at-KhilaM. fundamentalsof jurisprudence (Usill aI-Fiqh), fun-damentalsof religion (Usüi al-Din), logic and philosophy.In the field of philosophy Al-Ghazzaliyy read Al-Farabiyy(d. 345 A.H./950 CE.) and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) (d. 429A.H./1037 CE.).’°2Also, he readthe lettersof the Brethrenof Purity (Ikhwãnat-Safa)~ Al-Ghazzàliyyrankedveryhighamongthe studentsof the Nizamiyyah Al-Juwainiyy usedto ask Al-Ghazzãliyy to assist In lecturing to the otherstudents, even in his own presence.Al-Ghazzãliyy beganwriting his books during the life of Al-Juwainlyy. whichaccordingto Al-Subkiyy, might havebeena sourceof dis-comfort to his teacher.’°4

that Abu NasrwasthecousinofAbu Al-Qasim’s grandfather.Manyorientalists and Muslim scholarscopied themistakeof Al Subklyy.FarldJabre,S.J.saidin Mideo,Vol. I, p. 77, that itwasAbuAl-Qasimwho taught Al-Ghazzaliyy. Badawi,Mu’auafat Al-Chazali, p. 4.

100 Scholars,includingAl-Ghazzaliyy.usedto dictatetheir books.101 Al-Subkiyy. Vol. VI, p. 195.102 we know this from Al-Ghazzaliyy’s writings about them first in

MaqasidaI-Falasifahandlateron In hiscritiqueofphilosophyTahafuta(-FaIo.sifaft

103 Theseare fifty onelettersof anundergroundgroup of philosopherswho called themselvestheBrethrenof Purity. In theseletters theyattemptedto reconcilephilosophyandSharl’ah.Al-Zubaydiyy, p. 28.

104 Al-Subkiyy, Vol. VI. p. 196.

18

ThE LIFE OFAL-GHAZzALIYY

1.3.2 Teaching at the Nizamiyyah,The “Spiritual Crisis”

After the deathof Al-Juwainiyy, Al-Ghazziliyy went to theCamp (Ai-Mu’astcwi, to see vizier Nizãm al-Mulk, whosecourtwasameetingplacefor scholars.There,Al-Ghazzaliyydebatedwith other scholarsand won their respect.Alterabout six years at Al-Mu’askar, Nizãm Al-Mulk assignedAl-Ghazzaliyy to teach at the Nizamiyyah of Baghdad.Helecturedtherebetween484A.H./1091 C.E. and488A.H./1095 C.E.’°5This position won him prestige , wealth, and“respect that even princes, kings and sriziers could not

‘°~Accordingto theHanbalitescholarIbnAl-Jawziyy(d. 597 A.H./1200 C.E.) who studiedat the handsof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s studentjudge Ibn Al-’Arabiyy, Al-Ghazzãliyycame to Baghdaddirectly from Asfahan where the Campmust havebeenlocated.’67

At the Nizamiyyah, severalhundredstudentsusedtoattend the lectures of Al-Ghazzaliyy. Some of those stu-dents becamefamous scholars,judges, and few becamelecturers at the Nizãmiyyah of Baghdad itself.’°5 Alsoscholarslike Ibn ‘Aqil andAbüAl-Khattãb,amongtheheadsof the Hanbalite school of jurisprudence, attended hislecturesand Incorporatedthem in theirwritings.’09

The endof Al-Ghazzáliyy’s careerat the Nlzãrniyyahof

105 Al-Subklyy. Vol. VI, pp. 196-197.106 Al-Zubaydlyy, Vol. 1, p. 7.107 Ibn Al-Jawzlyy. Al-Muntazamft Tas-ikh at’Muluk Wa al-Umam,

(Hayderabad:Da’lrat al-Ma’arifat-‘Uthmanlyyah.1939)Vol. IX, p. 55.108 They included: JudgeAhu NasrAl-Khamqariyy (d. 544 A.H./1 149

C.Ej: Abu Bakr Ibn A1-’Arabiyy aI-Maliklyy (d. 545 A.H./1150 C.E.)whowasquotedfrequentlyincriticism ofAl-Ohazzaliyy:Abu ‘AbdullahShall’ Ibn ‘Abd Ar-Rashid Al-Jiliyy Al-Shafl’iyy (d. 541 AM/i 146CE.), whoselectureswere attendedby Ibn Al-Jawziyy: Abu MansurSadIbn MuhammadAl-Bazzar(d. 539A.M.! 1144C.EJ;who taughtat theNizamiyyah.:ImamAbu Al-Fath Ahmad Ibn ‘All Ibn Burhan(d.SlsA.H./ 1124C.E.).whotaughtattheNizamlyyahforashortperiod:andAbu ‘Abduliäh Ibn Thmart. founder of A1-Muwahhldun stateinAl-Maghrib. among many others. AI-Shirbasiyy made a mistake inlisting Abu Hamid Al-Isfaraylnlyy (d. 406 A.M./1015 CE.). who wasone oftheheadsof theShafl’ites, amongthestudentsofAl-Ghazzaliyy.SeeAl-Shirbasiyy, p. 32.

109 Al-Shirbasiyy. p. 31.

19

AL-CHAZZALIYY

Baghdadwas unexpected.The circumstancessurroundingthis event became known as the “spiritual crisis”0 ofAl-Ghazzãliyy. Al-Ghazzaliyy discussed the reason thatprompted him to quit his position in his autobiographicalwork, DeliverencefromError (Al-Munqidhmirz al-Daihi) , in thesection of Sufism. The aim of this book was to show Al-Ghazzaliyy’s quest for knowledge. After discussing themethodsof Al-Mutakallimün,” the philosophersand theBatinites respectively,Al-Ghazzãliyy chosethe method oftheSufisastheright methodfor theacquiringof knowledge.This method had prerequisites;one should abandon allworldly attachments.Al-Ghazzallyythoughtthat, in ordertoimplementthis , he should “shun fame, moneyand to runawayfrom obstacles”.112He madeit clear thatanydeedthatwas not for thesakeof Allah,”3 wasan obstacle.Al-Ghazza-liyy scrutinizedhis activities, including teaching, andde-cided that his motivation was not for the sake of Allah.”4Al-Ghazzãliyy wanted to abandon those obstacles butthe temptation was very strong. He spent six monthsstrugglingto stopteaching,until he no longerhadachoice.Of this Al-Ghazzaliyysaid:

“For nearlysix monthsbeginningwith Rajab,488A.H.July, 1095 CE.), I was continuouslytossedaboutbe-tweenthe attractionsof worldly desiresand the im-pulses towards eternal life. In that month the matterceasedto be oneof choiceandbecameoneof compul-sion. (Allah) causedmy tongueto dry up so that I waspreventedfrom lecturing. Oneparticular day I wouldmakeaneffort to lecturein order to grati~rtheheartsofmy following, but my tonguewould not utter a singleword nor could I accomplishanythingat all.””5

110 Al-A ‘sum,p. 42: M-Shirbasiyy,p. 34: Dimashqiyyah,p. 43.111 Muslim theologianswho incorporatedlogic in their subjectmatter,

whichbecameknown as ‘Il,n al-Kalam.112 Ai-Ghazzaliyy. Deliverer-we,p. 134.113 I usedtheword“Allah’ Insteadof‘God” becausethelatterhasvarious

connotations.in different religions and cultures, that might notrepresenttheIslamic concept.

114 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Deliverance,p. 134,115 Algazali,“Deliverancefrom Error.” Philosophyin theMiddleAges,eds.

Arthur I-lyman, andJames J. wal5h (Indianapolis:HackettPublish-

ing Cp., 1987) .277,

20

ThE LIFE OFAL-CHAZZALIYY

Thefact thatAl-Ghazzàliyycouldnotspeakcausedhimgrief, which eventually effected his ability to digest food.SoonAl-Ghazzãliyy’shealthdeterioratedandthephysiciansgaveup anyhope andstatedthat the only wayto cure himwas by solving his psychologicalproblems. Realizing hisimpotence,andworseningsituation,Al-Ghazzãliyy “soughtrefuge with Allah who made it easyfor his heart to turnawayfrom positionandwealth,from childrenandfriends.”6He distributedhis wealth retaining only as much aswouldsuffice him andhis children, In public, he declaredthat hewas going to make pilgrimageto Makkah, while in fact, hewas planning to go to Syria. Al-Ghazzàliyy had this planbecausehewasconvincedthat the Caliph andthe scholarsof Baghdad would not understandhis position; he wasafraid that they might prevent him from leaving.”7 Al-Ghazzãliyyaskedhis brotherAhmad to replacehim at theNizamiyyah.”8 and left Baghdadwith the intentIon neverto return.”9

AlthoughAl-Ghazzàliyyusedclearandsimplelanguagein describingthe reasonwhy he left the Nlzamiyyah, thereweresomecontemporaryscholarswho usedAl-Ghazzãliyy’saccount of that event to “diagnose” his sickness.12°Al-Ghazzãliyy describedin greatdetails his physical andspi-ritual conditions. It seemsthat those details invited somecontemporary scholars to leave the realm of philosophyto medicine in their attempt to diagnoseAl-Ghazzàliyy.Although it is not the aim of this book to definewhat thejobof philosophyis, looking for symptomsin autobiographicalworks, is not philosophyper se.One cannot but criticizeand reject suchunphilosophicalattitudes.

Al-Ghazzãliyy’s declared motives for his departuredfrom Baghdadin DeliveranceFrom Error have beenchal-lengedby two scholars. DuncanBlack Macdonald arguedthat Al-Ghazzãliyy left Baghdadbecausehefelt that hewaspersonanongratawith the SultanBarkyaruq)2’ Accordingto Macdonald, this was becauseAl-Ghazzãliyy sided with

116 Al-Gazzaliyy, Deliverance.p. 278,117 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance,p. 137.118 Ai-Zubaydiyy, Vol. I, p.7.119 M-Ghazzaliyy, Delivenrence,p. 137.120 A1-Shirbasiyy,p. 37.121 watt. p. 140.

21

AL-C IIAZZALIYY

Tutush (d. 488 A.H./ 1095 CE.), uncle and rival of Bark-yaruq. In fact Al-Ghazzàliyy mentioned that this opinionwas in circulation in Deliverancefrom Error. This opinion.which goesback in history to the time of Al-Ghazzaliyy,contradicts Al-Ghazzaliyy’s account of his relationshipwith thosein authority at the time. It is quite clear, rather,that hewascourtedby them.’22Besides,if his onlygoal wasto disappear from Baghdad in order to escapepoliticaldifficulties, he could have done so without going to thetrouble of becominga Sufi.

Theother challengeto Al-Ghazzãliyy’s accountwassetforth by Farid Jabrewho claimed that A1-Ghazzãliyy fledBaghdadfor fear of assassinationby the Batinltes.’2’ Thecriticisms of Macdonald’s opinion also apply here. Inaddition, one could argue that if it were true that Al-Ghazzãliyy feared for his life, he should have looked forplaceslocatedfar away from the influenceof theBatinites.However,he went to DamascusandJerusalemwhich wereunder the direct influence of the Fatimids. Furthermore,at the end of his journey, Al-Ghazzãliyy returned to Ni-shapur, which was very close to the strongholdsof theBatinites, during the peak of political assassinations.’24Thus it is untenable that Al-Ghazzãliyy’s fear of assas-sinationcould haveplayed any role in his departurefromBaghdad.His own account,on the otherhand, is perfectlycomprehensible.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s abandonmentof almost everythingthathe possessedandhis choiceof the spiritualpathof Su-fism (tariqah) shouldnot come as a surprise. He readthebooksof Sufis suchasAbüNib Al-Makkiyy’s Qitt al-QuliTh(Foodof the Hearts),the booksof Al-Harith Al-Muhãslbiyy,and the fragments of Al-Junayd, Al-Shlbliyy, and AbüYazid Al-Bistamiyy.’25 Al-Ghazzãllyy’s position was consis-tent with thoseof theabovementionedSufis. Hechosetheirmethodologyas the onethat could best fulfill his questforknowledge.A1-Muhàsibiyy(d. 243A.H./857 C.E.), for exam-

122 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Dehverance,137.123 watt, p. 140.124 Watt, pp. 140—143.125 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance.p. 131,

22

ThE LIFE OFAL-GI-IAZZALIYY

ple, withdrew from public life and died in want.’26 Like-wise, Al-Junayd (d. 298 A.H./910 C.E.), a studentof Al-Muhasibiyy. had doubts whether he was worthy to givelectures.’27A1-Shibliyy(d. 334 A.H./946 C.E.), a studentofAl-Junayd, was the governor of Dunbawind, canton ofRayy. also renouncedthe world and askedof the inhabi-tantsimmunity for his pastconduct. Hethensubmittedhisresignation.’28Al-Bistamiyy (d. 261 A.H./874 C.E.) statedthat hegainedknowledgeof theworld by meansof ahungrybelly.’2°Following suit. Al-Makkiyy (d. 386 A.H./996 C,E,)advocated self-mortification: he lived for a considerabletime on nothing but wild herbs.’3°Their influence on Al-Ghazzaliyyis unmistakable.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s internal strugglemight havebeentrig-geredby thevisIt ofAbü Al-HusaynArdashirlbn MansürAl-‘Abbãdiyy to the Nizamiyyah in 486 A.H.I 1093 CE. Hispreaching,whichAl-Ghazzãliyyattended,wassoInfluentialthat “more than thirty thousand men and women werepresentat his circles, many people left their livelihood,manypeoplerepentedandreturnedto mosques,wineswerespilled and instrumentsof play (i.e. music) werebroken.”3’

1.3.3 The Journeys of .A1-Ghazzãliyy

It wasa partof the pathof the Sufi to travel from oneplaceto anotherandto visit tombs of good people.Visiting ceme-teries are intendedto help the Sufi puri1~’his soul, sincethe sight of the graves teachesone a lesson about thetemporaland limited natureof this lIfe.

Based upon Al-Ghazzaliyy’s account In Deliverancefrom Error, his trip, after leavingBaghdadin 488A.H. / 1095C.E., could be outlined as covering the following cities in

126 Ibn Khallikan, Wafayatat-A’yanwaAnab’Abna’ al-Zaman, tans. B.Mac Guckin Dc Slane:TheJohnJ. Burns Library, Bostoncollege.chestnutHill, MA 02167(ParIs: Printed for theOriental TranslationFundof GreatBrltaln And Ireland, 1843)Vol. I, p. 365.

127 lbn Khamkan,Vol. I, p. 338.128 Ibid.,Vol.I,p.511.129 Ibid., Vol.1, p. 662.130 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance,p. 131.131 Ibn Kathir, Vol. XII, p. 144.

23

AL-GHAZZLIYY

chronologicalorder: Damascus(where he stayed “close totwo years”,’32Jerusalem,Hebron, Makkahand Madinah.’33He laterreturnedto Baghdad’~in JumadaAl-Akhirah, 490A.H./June, 1097 CE.’35 From there he went to Tus andlived in seclusion (khalwa), exceptwhen he had to attendto family affairs.’~Al-Ghazzaliyyendedhis seclusion,whichlasted for eleven years,’37 to teach at the Nizamiyyah ofNishapur”8 in 499A.H,/ 1106 C.E.His stayin Nishapurwasrather short. he returnedto Tus where he remaineduntilhis deathon Monday, Jumadaal-Akhirah, 505 A.H./De-cember18, 1111 C.E.’39

Therehavebeenotheraccountsof the routeAl-Ghaz-zãliyy took in his journey; they advocatethe notion thathe visited Alexandria in Egypt on his way to Yusuf IbnTashafln, and that he returnedwhen he learnedthat IbnTashãfln had died.’4°All other accountsconfirm that Al-Ghazzaliyywasin Khurasan,adistrictin !ersia,in 500A.H./1106 C.E., the year in which Ibn Tashafindied.’4’ The ideathat Al-Ghazzaliyy was in Egypt may be refuted on twoaccounts.His student, Ibn Al-’Arabiyy saw him, after re-turning from his journey, in the wildernessof Baghdadin491 A.H./1097 C.E. In addition, Al-Ghazzaliyy’s accountthat he wasin Nishapur. Khurasan,in Dhu al-Qi’dah, 499A.H./July 1106,~2is a clear indication of the falsity ofsuchclaims.

AccordingtoAl-Subkiyy, Al-Ghazzãliyyleft Baghdadin488 A.H./ 1095 CE., and went to perform pilgrimage InMakkah,beforehewent toDamascusin 489A.H./ 1096C.E.In Damascus,he stayedfor a few days as a faqir (lIterallypoor, anotherway of referring to a Sufi) beforeheadingtoJerusalem,wherehe remainedfor awhile. FromJerusalem

132 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Deliverance,p. 138.133 Ibid., pp. 137—139.134 AI-Subkiyy, Vol. VI. p. 200.135 Watt, p. 201.136 Al-Ghazzallyy, Deliverance.p. 138.137 Ibid., p. 159.138 Al-Zubaydiyy, Vol. I, p. 8.139 Al-Subkiyy, Vol. VI. p.20L140 Al-Zubaydiyy, Vol. I, p. 8.141 Badawi, p. 23.142 A]-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance.p. 159.

24

ThE UFE OF AL-GHAZZALIYY

he returned to Damascus.There he chose the westernminaret of the Umayyadmosqueashis placeof seclusion.

Fromtherehereturnedto Baghdadwherehepreached,andlecturedon his ihyä’ ‘Ilium al-Dirt for awhile.’43It mustbe noted that the order of the journeydoesnotcorrespondto that of Al-Ghazzaliyy.

In Deliverancefrom Error, Al-Ghazzàliyy states thathe stayedin Damascusalmosttwo years.He usedto spendhis days in seclusionand isolation by locking himself in-side the minaret of the mosqueof Damascus.For the dura-tion of his stay there, he kept himself busy puril~lnghissoul, polishing his morals,andcleansinghis heartto makeremembrance(dhikr) of Allah, in the fashion he graspedfrom thebooksof theSufls.’44

WhenAl-Ghazzaliyy left Damascusfor Jerusalem,hecontinued to live in isolation. He used to enter the Rock(Al-Sakhrah)’45whereinhe lockedhimself. Then,aftervisit-ing the tomb of prophetIbrahim ta.s.1in Hebron,hewent toperform pilgrimageto the Ka’bah146in Mekkahand to visItMadinah,whereprophetMuhammadLS.A.A.S.I wasburied.

At this stage, Al-Ghazzãliyy missed his chIldren.’47He returned home, to Tus after a brief stay in Baghdadatthe Ribat’48 of Abii Said A1-Naysaburiyy, in front of theNizamiyyah.’49 In Tus, he continued to live in seclusionalthough his seclusionwas Interruptedfrom time to timebecauseof family affairs.’5°Elevenyears elapsedbetween

143 A1-Subkiyy, Vol. VI, pp. 197-200.144 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Deliverance,p. 138.145 This “Rock” is locatedin theyard of Al-Aqsa mosquein Jerusalem.

Thereis a mosquebuilt on that location: It Is called Domeof theRock. Muslims believe that prophet Muhammad travelled fromMakkahto AI-Aqsa mosquein anightjourney. Al-Qur’an 17:1.Fromthepositionof that “Rock”, prophetMuhammadIS.A.A.S.Iascendedto heavens, before returning to Makkah:all this with the help of .Jibril(Gabriel).This eventis known asthe Isra’ andMi’raj. In contempo-rary Islamicpolitical thought,thisevent,amongotherthings,is usedto supporttheideaof theIslamizationof Jerusalem.Henceit hasaspiritualvaluethat led Al-Ghazzaliyyto visit it in his questfor truth.

146 TheKabahis thehousethathasbeenbuilt by prophetIbrahimandhis sonprophetIsmail (lshmael).

147 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance,p. 138.148 Lodge for the Sufis where they can have free room andboard.149 A1-QarahDaghi. Vol. I. p. 122.150 Ai-Ghazzallyy. Deliverance.p. 139.

25

AL-GRAZZALIVY

Al-Ghazzãliyy’s departure from Baghdad to the end ofhis life of isolation.’5’

Al-Ghazzãliyy’s journeys had many consequences.HewroteIhyã’ IlIum al-Din andA1-RIsaiahai-Qucisiyyaltfi al-‘Aqã’Ld. In Hebron, he pledgedthree things: not to acceptmoneyfrom any Sultan, not to visit any of them,andneverto debateany person.Al-Ghazzaliyy fulfilled thesepledges.For money, he dependedon his estatein Tus; its incomeprovidedhim with hisneed.’52Most importantly, hecametoknow “without doubt (yaqiri) that the Sufis are the (true)dwellers (sãlikün) on the pathof Allah, their conductis thebest,and their method is the bestmethod.”5’

Al-Ghazzãliyy endedhis seclusion,in 499 A.H./ 1105C.E., at a requestfrom the vizier FakhrAl-Mulk to teachattheNizamiyyahof Nishapur.’54He agreedto returnto teach-ing after “consultingwith mastersof thehearts’55who agreedthat he could leave his seclusion.”56To indicatethat therewas no contradiction between leaving the Nizamiyyah ofBaghdadand joining that of Nishapur, Al-Ghazzãliyy saidthat at the fIrst he taught sciencesthat brought aboutfame, but at the latter, he taught knowledge that led todesertingsuch fame. He justified his move by quoting se-veral versesfrom the Qur’an,’57 that madepreaching,thejob of the prophets, a priority, even if discomfortwas theconsequence.Furthermore, Al-Ghazzaliyy said that thetiming of this coincides with the beginning of the fifthcenturyA.H.,whichheconsideredagoodomen.’58Accordingto a hadith, prophet Muhammad[S.A.A.S.] said that Allahsendsto this nation (Muslim), at the headof eachhundredyears,someoneto renew (yujaddki) its religion.’59 Al-Ghaz-zaliyy believed that he was the renovator (mujaddki) ofthat century.

151 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance,p. 159152 A1-QarahDaghi.Vol. 1. p. 118.153 AI-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverertce,p. 139.154 Al-Qarah Daghi,Vol.1, p. 123.155 Arablc=arbabal-qulub. by whichA1-GhazzaliyymeanttheSuBs,156 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Deliverance,p. 159.157 Al-Qur’an29:1, 6:24, and36:11.158 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Deliverence,pp. 158—159.159 ThishadithwasnarratedbyAbuDawud,Al-Hakim, andAl-Bayhaqiyy.

26

ThE UFEOFAL-GHAZZALIYY

The exact duration of Al-Ghazzãliyy’s teachingat theNizamiyyahof Nishapuris notknown. It is believedthoughthatheleft aftertheassassinationof thevizier Fakhral-Mulklbn NizãmAl-Mulk, bya Batinite, on the dayof ‘Ashura’, the10thof Muharram,500 A.H./ 1106 CE.’6°

SubsequentlyAl-Ghazzãliyy returnedto Tus, wherehebuilt a lodge for the Sufis (khàriaqàh) anda school next tohis house. He hadabout one hundredand fifty students.Therewereattempts,byvizier AhmadIbn NizãmAl-Mulk (d.544AR! 1149 C.E.). to convinceAl-Ghazzãliyyto return tothe Nizamiyyahof Baghdadafter the deathof its teacher,llkiya Al-Harasiyy (d. 504 A.H./1110 C.E.), who was Al-Ghazzãliyy’scolleagueduring the daysof Al-Juwainiyy. Al-Ghazzãliyydeclinedthe offer.’6’

1.3.4 .A1-Ghazziliyy and the Scienceof Hadith

Al-Ghazzàliyy has beencriticized for his weaknessin thescienceof hadith. It appearsthat in that milieu jurists, likehimself neglectedto a certaindegreethis sciencebecausethey consideredthe scholarsof hadith below the level ofjurists. Al-Ràziyy (d. 313 A.H./925 CE.) said, “As for thepeople of hadith, they memorize the traditions of theMessengerof Allah, mayAllah’s peaceandprayersbeuponhim, but they are not capableof reasoningand debate.Every time jurists presentthem with a questionor a pro-blem they fail to answerandget “puzzled”.”’°2However,theposition of the jurists led scholarsof hadith to eventuallyadopta similar position.

Moreover, therewere many scholarswho considereddevoting one’s life to seeking fridith and narrating it aworldly activity unless the goal was for the sakeof Allah.Abü Tãlib Al-Makkiyy (d. 386 A.H./996 C.E.) narrated inQüt Al-QuFub, which Al-Ghazzãliyy mentioned in Al-Mun-qidh mm al-Dalàl as one of the sourcesthat shapedhisthought about Sufism,’63 that Abü Sulaymân al-Dàraniyy

160 Badawi, p. 25.161 A1-QarahDaghi, Vol.1. pp. 134—136.162 Muhammad Hasan1-litu, Introduction, Al-Mankhul mm Ta’liqat at-

Usul, by Al-Ghazzaliw (Damascus: Dar al-Flkr. 1970)p. 4.163 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh, p. 131.

27

AL-GHAZZALIYY

said: “a man who seeksHadith, getsmarried or travels tofind a job is a worldly person”.’°4One could only add thatif this was the position of the Sufis, the position of Al-Ghazzäliyyshouldnot comeasa surprise.

Though Al-Ghazzaliyywas an outstandingscholar inmanyfields of knowledge,ignoringtheScienceof hadkit cannot be justified becauseit led to the inclusion of unsoundnarrations in his writings. This science(‘tim mustalahal-hadith) had developed,as an independentfield of study, acenturybefore his birth. At least four major books on ‘timmustalahaI-liathth werewritten during that time.’65 Moreo-ver, in the lastparagraphof his book Qanun aI-Ta’wil, Al-Ghazzaliyy confessedthat his knowledgein the scienceofhadith was little.’66

In addition, the large number of narrators (muhad-dmthan)indicatesthe importanceof this field which In returnexplains the criticism to Al-Ghazzaliyy regarding hisweaknessin narrating iadtth. According to Al-Khatlb Al-Baghdädiyy (d. 463 A.H./1071 C.EJ in Tczrikh Baghdad.Baghdadwasthe homeof morethanfive thousand’67schol-arsof hadith during the first five centuriesA.H.’~

Like all jurists andscholarsof the time. Al-Ghazzaliyywas introduced to the science of ho.dith as part of hiseducation.Yet It appearsthat he did not study this scienceasanindependentsubject.Critics of Al-Ghazzaliyypointed

164 Abu Talib al-Makkiyy, Qut al-Qulub (Dar Sadir: No Place, N.D.)Vol. 1, p. 135.

165 Thesewere 1. Al-MuhaddmthaI-Fasll bayn al-Rawl Wa al-Wa’m byA1-Ramharamziyy (d. 360 A.H./964 cE.). 2. Ma’nfat ‘Ulwn at-Hadith by A1-Hakim al-Naysaburiyy (d. 405 A.H./1O14 cE.).3. Al-Mustakhraj ‘ala Ma’rtfat ‘Ulum al’Hadlth by Abu Na’im Al-Asbahaniyy (d. 430 A.H./1038 CE.). 4. Al-K(fayah ii ‘Jim Al-Riwayahby A1-Khatlb al-Baghdadiyy(d. 463 A.H./1070 CE.). SeeAt-Tahhan,p.10

166 A1-Ghazzaliyy. Ma’arij al-Quds ft Ma’rtfat Al-Nafs and Qanun cii-Ta’wil (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindl. 1968)p. 246.

167 The actualnumber ofentriesin Tarikh Baghdadwere 7831 of which32 were women scholars. It should be noted that Al-Baghdadiyy didnot includethescholarswhowerestill alive at thetime whichmeansthat thenumberof scholarswasstill higher.

168 Munir-ud-din Ahmed, Muslim Education and the Scholar’s SocialStatus up to the 5th Century Muslim Era in the Light of “TarikhBaghdad”, Sami Al-Saqqar,trans. and ed. (Rlyad: Dar al-Marrlkh,1981) p. 20.

28

THELIFE OFAL-GHAZZALIYY

to this issue as something that undermined his works,especiallyIhya’ ‘[hum al-Din, becauseit included “weak”69and forged (mawdu’) narrations.Al-Subkiyy wrote a wholechapter in which he classified all the forged narrationsthat were without proper sanad(chain of narrators), thatappearedin the Ihyã’. Their number was morethan ninehundred.’7°It must be noted that Al-Subklyy, in his veri-fication of these narrations, considered the math (text)of the hadfthasit appearedin the Ihya’ asawhole: someofthesenarrationsincluded partsthat aresound.As a prac-tical precaution, in order to be aware of the statusof thehadith. one should use anedition of the Ihyã’ that hasAl-‘lrãqiyy’s (d. 806 A.H./ 1404 CE.) verification (takhnj) inthe margin.’7’

The reporting of a “weak” narration,which has manylevels,was not rejectedaltogetherby all scholarsof hadit/i.Dr. Al-Tahhanstatesthat therewerescholarswho allowedthe useof suchnarrationIn preaching,but neverin ‘aqidah(creed).or injurisprudence.He addedthat Al-Thawriyy andAhmad Ibn IIanbal were among those who allowed suchusage.Moreover,this hadith shouldbe narratedin a“weak-ened” (tad’~JP72form.’73Thescholarswhorejectedthe“weak”narrationsaltogetherincludeAl-Bukhariyy, Muslim, YahyaIbn Ma’in Id. 233 A.H./835 C.E.), lbn Hazm (d. 456A.H./1064 C.E.), andAl-Ghazzãliyy’s student,thejudge. Ibn Al-‘Arabiyy. Among the contemporaries,Ahmad MuhammadShakir, and MuhammadNãslr Al-Din A1-Albaniyy held thelatter position. In al-BU’tth al-Hath~th,a commentaryon

169 A hadith is consideredweak(da’(fi whenit lacksanyof theconditionsthat arenecessaryto renderit hasan (good). An exampleof theseconditionsIs that thechainof narrators(sanad)should not Includeany onewho is not ‘ciii!, which means‘trustworthy”, in aregulatedsense.A hadith that is classified hasa,,is still onedegreebelowthelevel of a narrationthat is sahth(sound).

170 Al-Subkiyy. Vol. VI. pp. 287-388.171 ‘Abd Al-Raiiim IbnAl-Husayn al-’Iraqiyy, Al-Mughnl ‘anHanil al-Asfar

ft al-Asfarfi TaJthr4maft al-Ihya’ min ai-Akhbar.172 The hadith shouldnot be introducedby the clause“prophet Mu-

hammadsaid”,whichprovidesafalseimpressionofa truestatement.Reportinga “weak” narrationshould startwith a form closeto in-directspeechin Englishgrammer(e.g. It hasbeensaid /narrated/reportedthatprophetMuhammad... etc.).

173 Mahmudal-Tahhan,Taysu-Mustalahal-Hadlth(Rlyad: Maktabata!-Ma’arif, 1981) p. 49.

29

AL-C i-IAZZALIYY

Ibn Kathir’s Ikhtisar ‘Chum al-Hddith, Shakir explainedthe position of the early Muslim Scholarswho permittedthe use of “weak” narrations by stating that during thetime of thosescholars(eg. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal),narrationsweredivided into two basic categories,sahlhanddaif. Thecategoryof hasart, which was advancedby Al-Tirmidhiyy(d. 279A.H. /880C.E.),wasnotyetdistinguishedfromsoundnarrations. It follows that those scholars were actuallypermitting the useof the hasannot the da’{f’74

It is important to mention that Abü Tãlib Al-Makkiyyadopted the position of Ahmad lbn Hanbal in narrating“weak” haditft The differencebetweenhim andAl-Ghazza-liyy is that he wrote a chapter in Qüt aI-Qulüb in which hedefendedtheuse of a hadith dajf’~~

Towards the end of his life, Al-Ghazzaliyy startedstudying the narrationsof prophet Muhammad [S.A.A.S.]He read Al-Bukhãriyy’s Sahth and Muslim’s Sahthi76According to Abu Al-Qãsirn lbn ‘Asãkir, Al-Ghazzãliyystudied Al-Bukhariyy’s Sahth at the hands of Abü SahIMuhammadIbn ‘Abd Allah Al-Hafsiyy. Also, Al-Sam’aniyyreports that Al-Ghazzaliyy studied Al-Bukhariyy’s SaM/iand Muslim’s Sahlhat the hands of Abü Al-Fityan ‘UmarIbn Abu Al-Hasan Al-Rawaslyy Al-Tüsiyy. Furthermore,‘Abd Al-Ghafir Ibn Isma’il Al-Khatib Al-Farisiyy Cd. 551A.H./ 1156 C.E.), who visited Al-Ghazzaliyy several timesbeforeandafterhechangedhiswayof life to Sufism.narratedthat it came to his knowledgethat A1-Ghazzaliyy studiedthe Sunanof Abu Dawud Al-Sijistaniyy at the hands ofAbii Al-Fath Al-Hakimiyy Al-Tusiyy.’77

The importanceof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s studyof the scienceof hadithcanbefoundin thequestionofwhetherhechangedhis method again. The answer to this question will bediscussedlateron in this book.’78

174 YusufAl-Qardawiyy. KayfaNata’o.malma’ al-Sunnahal-Nabawiyyah(A1-Max~surah: Dar al-wafa’, 1990)pp. 74—75.

175 Al-Makkiyy, Vol. 1, pp. 176—178.176 Al-Subkiyy, Vol. VI. p.210.177 Ibid.,Vol.IV,p.212.178 Seepage224.

30

THE LIFE OFAL-GHAZZALIYY

1.4 THE CREEDOF AL-GHAZZALIYY

Creed(‘aqidah) hasbeenalwaysa sensitiveissuein Islamiccircles. The only generationof Muslims that was spareddifferencesin opinion in this respectwas the companions(sahabah)of the prophet [S.A.A.S.]’79Theywereconsideredthe ancestors(salafi of the Muslims, and their creedwasacceptedby virtually every Muslim.’80 Thus, the creed ofthose ancestors(‘aqidah salafiyyali) becamea referencepoint whencreedwasin question.To indicatethat therewasnoproblemwith creedduringthefirst generationofMuslims,Al-Ghazzaliyy assertedin Al-Iqtisad ft Al-I’tiqad that “thecompanionsof the prophetFS.A.A.S.]did not discuss,teachor write about creed”.’8’ Furthermore,Al-Ghazzaiiyyaddedthatthecompanionswerepreoccupiedwithjurisprudence.’82

In addition, Al-Maqriziyy statedin hisK/ittat that if anyArab has asked prophet Muhammad [S.A.A.S.] about thedivine attributes,it shouldhavebeennarratedin thebooksof hadit/i. Furthennore,Al-Maqriziyy addedthat:

“If anyonelookscarefullyin thebooksof hadit/i andthestatementsabout the companions(al-at/ar al-salaflyyahjhe would know that therewere neither sound nor weakhadit/is that acompanionoftheprophet[S.A.A.S.] everaskedhim about the meaning of anything that Allah [S.W.T.]has describedhimself with in the Qur’an, despitethe factthat the companionswerenumerous.”’83

Thereweremany examplesbeforeandafter the time of

179 Ibn Al-Qaiyyim. ijtima’ al-JuyushaI-Islamiyyah, ‘Awwad ‘AbdullahAl-Mu’attaq, ed. (Riyad: Matabi’ Al-FarazdaqA1-Tijariyyah. 1988)pp. 118—131.

180 By MuslimshereI refer to what becameknown as “a/il ol-sunnnh”(peopleof thesunnah).Also, theyareknown as‘aid al-sunnahWaal-jama’ah’ (peopleof thesunnahandthegroup).As for the sectsandgroupsthatwere rootedin Islamandhada differentposition thanthat of theabove.Al-Baghdadiyylisted seventymajor branchesofthem in an apparentattemptto relatethis numberto anarrationofprophetMuhammadin which he professedthathis peoplewill bedivided into seventybranches.

181 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Iqttsadftal-I ‘tiqad (Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindi, 1972)p. 16.

182 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Al-Iqtisad, p. 20.183 MuhammadAbu Zahrah,Tarikh ai-Madhahib al-Islamiyyah(Cairo:

Dar al-flkr al-’Arabiyy, n.d.) p. 98.

31

AL-CI-LAZZALIYY

Al-Ghazzaliyythat reflect the way different schools (e.g. at-Ashã’irahP84andscholars(e.g.(bnTaymiyyah),weretreatedwheneverthere was any doubt or claims regarding theircreed,evenif theseclaims werepolitically motivated.

(havechosenIbn Taymiyyah, a leaderof theHanbaliteschool of jurisprudencewho flourishedtwo centuriesafterAl—Ghazzaliyy and was one of his critics, as an example.He was consideredthe leader of the Salafiyyah school,yet he was accused of incorporating anthropomorphicelementsinto his ‘Aqidah Wàsttiyyah.Two councils wereconvenedto verify the claims about his book. In the firstone, which was held in Damascus,he was acquitted ofthe charges.In the second,which took place in Cairo, hewas unjustly convictedand sentencedto prison for an in-definite period.’85

Asdiscussedabove,186theAshã’irites, who werealmostexclusivelyShafi’ites,weredeniedtheright to attendcongre-gationaland Friday prayersbecauseof the way they pre-sentedthe beautiful names (al-asmà’ al-husna) of Allah.Out of more than ninety nine names,’87Al-Ghazzallyy fol-lowed thefootstepsoftheAshã’irltesandusedtheir methodof Kalam (theologicalargumentation).188It shouldbe notedthat Al-Ash’ariyy himself and Al-Baqillanlyy (d. 403 A.H./1112 C.E.) followed the path of the salaf In the way theyunderstoodDivine attributes. It was the later Ashairites

184 Followers of Al-Ash’ariyy. Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Isma’il (260—324A.H./873-935CE.).He wasaMu’tazilitebutreturnedto themethodof the salafat later stagein his life andrenouncedtheMu’tazllites,

185 Merlin Swarz, ‘A seventh-century(AN.) Sunni creed: The ‘Aqidaliwasitiya of lbn Taymiya,” I-Iumaniora Islamica 1 (1973):102.

186 Seepage17.187 It is a common mistake to restrict the namesof Allah to ninety

nine names. In fact, there are more than the above mentionednumber. Although they are called “names” (asmal as in al-Qur’an,Suraal-A ‘raf 7:180, they are also called attributes (stfat) (i.e. theMerciful). In discussingtheversesin theal-Qur’anthatincludesuch‘attributes”,onereferto theseversesasagat al-stfat.

188 Al-Ghazzaliyy discussedthe following subject matters: life andomnipotence(al-hayah Wa aI-qudrai4. knowledge (at- ‘lImb will(al-b-adaJ-~),hearing and sight (al-sam’ Wa al-basa,), and speech(kalani). Al-Ghazrzaliyy. “Qawa’id al-’Aqa’ldfi aI-Tawh(d” Majmu’atRasa’il al-Imam A1-Ghazzaliyy (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’llmlyyah.1986)Vol. II, pp. 124—127.

32

THELIFE OFAL-GHAZZLIYY

who choseto discussthe subjectmatterof a few attributesas representativefor their importance,and they adoptedthe methodof metaphorical interpretation(ta’wil) in orderto avoid questions of anthropomorphism (tajstml). Thosewho belongto the latterincludeAl-GhazzallyyandAl-Räziyy.(d. 606A.H./ 1209 C.EJ’5°

The Ashà’iritesgot their method from their rivals, thetheologians(at-Mutakalltmun).This method,which was in-tended to defend Islamic Shari’ah against philosophy inthe first place,containedseveralphilosophical termssuchas the word “essence”~jawhar) and “accident” (‘ard). It isthe useof suchphilosophicalwords that upsettraditionalscholarsbefore and after the time of Al-Ghazzallyy. Hiscontemporary, Ibn ‘Aqil, head of the Hanbalite school atthe time, said aboutthis subject:

“I assure(you) that the companions(of the ProphetS.A.A.S.) died without knowing the (terms) “essence”and“accident”.So, if you would like to belike themyoucan,but if you think that the method of al-Mutakallimunis betterthanthemethodof AbU Bakr arid ‘Umar,‘9°thiswould be theworstof your opinions.”’9’

Basedon his useof the abovementionedmethod,Al-Ghazzaliyy was “accused” of being an Ash’àrite by theSalafiyyahschool.192ThereweremanyMuslim scholarswhoconsidered him so; they have used neutral language Inclassi1~inghim as an Ash’arlte, Among those we find themedievalscholarsAl-Subkiyy andAl-Zubaydiyy who statedthat to judge what someonebelievesbelongsto Allah. Healso addedthat after reviewing most of the works of Al-Ghazzaliyy and the booksof his contemporarieswho sawhim, hereachedtheconclusionthatAl-Ghazzaliyy“wasmostprobably an Ash’ãrite” ~ In addition, among the contem-porarieswe find that Sulaymàn Dunya is very supportive

189 Ibn al-Qaiyyim, p. 120.190 Abu Bakr, ‘Abdullah Ibn abuQuhafah.thefirst Caliph, and‘Umar

Ibn A1-Khattab,thesecondCaliph.191 Ibn Al-Jawziyy,TalbLs It,Us (Beirut: Daral-Kutubal-’Ilmiyyah, 1949)

p. 85.192 Dlmashqiyyah,p. 89.193 Al-Zubaydiyy, p. 30.

33

AL-CHAZZALIYY

of the idea that Al-Ghazzaliyy was an Asha’irite. In fact.Dunya said that Al-Ghazzaliyy advocatedAsha’irism inAt-Iqttsadfi at-I ‘tiqad.~

A ratherdifferentopinioncamefromamedievalMuslimscholar.This time from lbn Rushd (Averroes)(d. 595 A.H./1198 C.E.) thegreatcritic of Al-Ghazzaliyy. RegardingtheAsha’irism of Al-Ghazzaliyy Ibn Rushd stated in Fast at-MaqatJima Bayrt al-Hikmah wa al-Sltari’ah mm Ittisat thatAl-Ghazzaliyy maintained a relative position and that hedid notcommithimself to any oneschool andthat “he wasanAsha’irite with the Asha’irites, a Sufi with the Sufis anda philosopherwith the phflosophers”.Among the contem-porariesa similar position is held by Dimashqiyyahwhosays that Al-Ghazzaliyy was an Ash’äirite only when headdressedthe generalpublic (at- ‘awãm).’°5

A strong position against the Ash’arism of Al-Ghaz-zãliyy wasadvancedby GeorgeMakdisi. In his article ‘TheNon-Ash’arite Shafl’lsm Of Ghazzaliyy,”°6Makdisl statesthat Al-Ghazzaliyy was not an Ash’arite for a number ofreasons.Thefirst onewasthatA1-Ghazzaliyyneverdeclaredhimself anAsh’árite.Yet this argumenthasthesameweightas one saying that Al-Ghazzaliyy never denied being anAsh’arite. Thesecondargumentwasbasedon the ideathatthe deedof the Nizamiyyah collegeinsisted in having theShafI’ite Usül at-Ftqh as the official position that shouldbe taught. According to Makdisi, Al-Shafi’iyy foundedthismethod against the method of Kalani. Makdisi also addsthat the professors of the Nlzamiyyah distanced them-selvesfrom the Ash’arites. As for his position towards Al-Ghazzaliyy’sal-Iqtisadft at-I’tiqdd, Makdisi says,aftercon-firming that Al-Ghazzâliyy followed theAsh’arite method Inwriting this book, that “this work does not representGhazzaliyy’sown inner convIctions”~

In my opinion, thereality aboutA1-Ghazzaliyy’spositionregarding the Ash’arite method can be deducedfrom the

194 Dimashqiyyah.p. 94.195 Dimashqiyyah,pp. 94—98.196 GeorgeMakdlsi, ‘The NonAsh’arlteShaii’ism Of Ghazzall,” Reveudes

EtudesIslamiques54 (1986)pp. 239—257.197 Makdisi, pp. 244—249.

34

THELIFE OFAL-GHAZZALIYY

“appearances”which for us are restricted to his works,since we do not have accessto his “inner convictions”.Whether Al-Ghazzaliyy was or was not an Ash’arite, hecertainlyusedthatmethodology.It appearsthatheusedtheAsh’arlte methodology or Kalam, but not blindly. In hisintroduction to Faisal al-Tafriqah bayn al-Islam wa at-Zaridaqah. Al-Ghazzaliyy criticized those Ash’ãrites whothought that deviating from the method of Al-Ash’kriyy, nomatterhow little, was heretical.’96It is rather important toknow that Al-Ghazzaliyy referred to Al-Ash’ariyy in hisearlier writings as “our teacher” (shaykhw-ia)which couldbe an important factor In determiningthe relationshipbe-tweenthe two especiallyIf we know that on the samepagewhereAl-Ghazzaliyy quotesAl-Ash’ariyy he quotesanotherscholarwithout referringtohim as“shaykhurta”.’°9Towardstheendof hislife, Al-GhazzaliyywroteliJamAl-‘Awam ‘art ‘Ilmal-Kalj’,rrj in which hecriticized themethodof theAsh’aritesand Kalam. In addition there are numerous places in TheRevivalof Islamic Scienceswhere he criticized Kalam. Inthe book of knowledge(kitab at- ‘tim), which is the first offorty chaptersof the Ihya’, not only A1-Ghazzaliyycriticizedlcalam but he also listed it along with unacceptablein-novations (bida’) of which children who were reachingmaturity shouldbe protected.2°°

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s position on many other controversialsubjects(e.g., logic) will be addressedasthey unfold in thisbook.TheideathatAl”Ghazzaliyy’s theoryof knowledgehasdevelopedthroughouthis life, shall providean explanation,andnot necessarilya defence,to many of the raisedques-tions.Thefollowing chapterswill discussthis idea.

198 Ibn Al-Jawziyy. Tolbis Iblis (Beirut: Daral-Kutubal-’llmlyyah, 1949)p- 85.

199 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Mankhul,p. 36.200 Al-Ghazzaliyy, lhya’. Vol. I, p. 15.

35

Chapter TWOAL-GHAZZALIYY’S THEORY OFKNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT(465—478A.H./1072-1085 C.E.)

This chapterdealswith A1-Ghazzaliyy’swritings asastudentand how thesewritings could be related to his epistemo-logical development during the above mentioned yearswhich endedwith the deathof his most important teacherAl-Juwainiyy in 478 A.H./ 1085 C.E. During these yearsAJ-Ghazzaliyywrote two major books: Al-TaiiqahftFuru’ a!-Madhhab(Noteson the Branches of the (Shaftite) School ofJurisprudence)and Al-Mankhül mist Taliqat al-Usdl (TheSifted from the Notes on the Fundamentalsof Jurispru-dence).’ In addition, it dealswith Al-Ghazzãliyy’s laterworkAl-Munqidhmm al-PalEd(DeliverancefromError) in whichheprojected in clear terms his thoughts knowledgeduring thesameperiod.

2.1 AL-TA‘119.4II

Al-Ghazzallyy wrote his first book, Al-Ta liqah. when hetravelled to Juijan to study at the hands of Abü-Nasr Al-Ismã’lliyy. It seemsthat this book was simply a collection ofnotes on the lectures that he attended during the abovementionedjourney.2 Al-Ta ‘Iiqahwas lost andour knowledge

1 ThewordTa’lfqah is translatedby .J.G.Maya,S.J.as‘marginalnotes’ oras appendixof abook’: Al-Faru’id at’Durr4jyoii (Beirut:Liar Al-Mashrlq.1972) p. 495. 1 thInk that A1-Ohazzallyy intended this word, whichwas used In Its singular form Ta’Uqah’ In thetitle of the first book andin its plural form Ta’llqat’ in thesecond,to indicatethat thesenoteswere taken from the lectures of his teacher(i.e Al-Lsmaillyy) when hewasastudent,

2 A1-Subkiyy, Vol. IV, P. 195.

37

AL-GHAZZALIYY

of it is restricted to secondarysources.Thesesourcespro-vide a simplehistorical accountof the bookwithout dealingwith its contentsexceptsimply mentioningthatit wasaboutflqh accordingto the Shafi’ite schoolofjurisprudence.3

2.2 AL-MAIVKH[JL: THE QUESTION OF AUTHENTICITY

The only surviving book that could havebeenwritten du-ring thisperiodwas Ai-Mankh&1mittTaliqat al-UsEd.At leastone orientalist and one medievalMuslim scholardoubtedthat Ai-Manichuiwaswritten by Al-Ghazzaliyy. Theformer.Brockelmann, claimed in his Geschichteder ArabtscltenLitteratur that Ai-Martkhül was written by one of Al-Ghaz-zaliyys studentswithout speci~ingthereasonthat led himto suchclaim.ThelatterwasIbn FlajarA1-HaytamiyyCd. 973A.H./ 1565 C.E.) who said in his book Ai-Khayrât Ai-HisanF! Martaqib Ai-Nu’mcin that Ai-Mankhiil could not havebeen written by Al-Ghazzaliyy becauseit included harshcriticism of Abu Hanifah while A1-Ghazzaliyypraisedhimin Iltya’ ‘Ulum al-Din. Yet, it seemsthat Ibn Hajar Al-Hay-tamiyy wasnot sure of his position becausehe narratedadefenseof A1-Ghazzaliyyby Hanifites who explainedthattheseinsults werecommittedbyA1-Ghazzaliyywhenhewasa student and thus forgivable.4One could only add, asdiscussedin thepreviouschapter,thatA1-Ghazzaliyydeniedinsulting the personof Abü Hanlfah and declaredall suchinsults as forged additions to his book.5 The possibility ofalteringthe works of anyscholarat the timewasenormousdue to the fact that theseworkswerecopied manually.

The authenticity of al-Martkhul could be proven be-yond doubt from the cross-referencesthat Al-Ghazzaliyymadeto Al-MankhUlIn hisbookAl-Mustasfa,which hewroteafterreturning to teachingat the Nlzamiyyahof Nishapur,atthe requestof somestudentsof jurisprudencewho wantedhim to write a book on the fundamentals of jurisprudence(usEd al-fiqh) that would include “more details than Al-

3 Al-Zubaydiyy, p. 41.4 Badawl, pp. 7-9.5 Muhammad Hasan Hitu, Introduction,AI-Mankhu( mAn Ta’Liqat a[-USUI,

by AI-Ghazzaliyy (Damascus: Oar al-Fikr, 19701 pp. 31—33.

38

AL-GHAZZALIYYS THEORYOFKNOWLEDGEAS A STUDENT

Mankhulwhich is conciseandbrief.”6There remainsthe questionwhether al-Manlchfd was

written beforeor after the deathAl-Juwainiyy. Thehistorio-graphers (e.g. Al-Subkiyy) maintained that Al-Ghazzaliyywrote this book during the life of his teacher.7On the otherhand,therewerethosewho claimedthat Al-Ghazzaliyyusedto write a supplication (du’a) right after the name of Al-~Juwainiyy.8 This supplication, rahimahu Allah (i.e. mayAllah be merciful to him) usually indicatesthat the personwho’s namewasmentionedis deceased.The contradictionbetween those two positionscould be resolvedby pointingto the concluding paragraphof Al-Mankhcd in which Al-Ghazzallyystatedthat “this is the completionofAl-Mankhfdmitt Ta’li~qatal-UsCdafteromitting theextras.” In addition,Al-Ghazzãliyy said that he restricted (himself) to whateverAl-Juwainiyy - mayAllah bemerciful to him - hasmentionedin his lectures.”9 It is apparentthat at leastAl-Ghazzaliyywrote the original text of this book when he attendedthelecturesofAl-Juwalniyy. Thefactthatheomittedthe“extras”might indicatethat hewrote amodified versionof this bookafter thedeathof his teacherwhich explains thepresenceoftheabovementionedsupplicationsin thetextofAl-MankhuL

It shouldalso be notedthat Al-Ghazzaliyy’s laterworkin usEdal-fiqh (i.e. Al-Mustasfa)reflectsadifferent approachto the fundamentalsof jurisprudencewhich exemplifiedthe originality of Al-Ghazzallyy’s writings after the deathofAl-Juwainiyy. Accordingly, I would argue that Al-ManJthfddoesnot fit into the works of the later Al-Ghazzaliyy thatportrayed an independentscholarand thus It could havebeenwritten only at an earlierstage(i.e. asa student).

Moreover, the above position towards Abu Hanifahwas explained in anotherway. In the introduction to acritical edition of al-MankhUl, Hito showed that Al-Ghazzãliyy was simply reiterating the position of Al-Juwainiyy, his teacher,in MughithAl-KhalqFiTarjthAl-Qawl

6 Al-Ghazzallyy, AI-Mustasfa mAn Rnt at-Usu[ (Bulaq: A1-Matba’ah a!-Amiriyyah, 1322A.H.) vol. I, p.4.

7 A1-Subkiyy,vol. 1~!,p. 225.S Hitu, p. 35.9 A1-Ghazza!iyy,At-Mankhul, p. 504.

39

AL-GHAZZAL!YY

Al- Haqq’°inwhichherankedtheShafi’lte schoolofjurispru-dencehigherthan that ofAbü Hanifah.Al-Ghazzãllyywrotea sectionat the endof al-Mankhftl in which he praisedAl-Shafiiyyandcriticized otherjurlstsincludingAbu Hanifah.”Also, many books (eg. Al-Baghdadiyy’s Tarikh BaghdO4lwhich werewritten during that period includedharshcrititcismof Abu Hanifahandyet no onedeniedthat thesebooksbelongedto their authors.’2

2.2.1 UsuI al-Fiqh

The fundamentalsof jurisprudence(usEdal-fiqh). the sub-ject matter of Al-Mankhid, deals with the methodologyby which the different questionsof jurisprudenceare an-swered.Historically, u?fdal-flqhwastheoutcomeof astrug-gle between the traditionalists (Ahi Al-Hadith) who’s me-thodology was basedon a more or less literal Interpreta-lions of the texts of the Sharl’ah, and the Hanafite juristswho allowed reasoningto play a more decisiverole in de-tenniningthe lawsof theShari’ah.Thelatterbecameknownasthe rationalists (Ahi al-Ra’y). Although tensionran highbetween both schools, the AhI Al-Hadith agreedwith AhlAl-Ra’y on the necessityof having recourseto reasonif thetexts of the Sharl’ah contained no specific reference towhatevercase they had.‘~The dispute betweenthese twoschools was not resolved until Al-Shafl’iyy wrote Al-Risalah in which he reconciled the two positions by es-tablishing the methodologythat lateron becameknown asusEd al-fiqh.’4 It is acommonlyacceptedfact thatall worksin usEdal-fiqh written after al-Risalahweredependenton It.

Following Al-ShafI’lyy’s lead there were many bookswritten in this field. Of these,ImamAl-Juwalnlyy wrote Al-

10 It shou!d be noted that the originality of this book was doubted.Althoughit waslistedby Thu Khallikanasoneof AI-Juwalnlyy’sbooks,it wasnot listed by lbn Kathir amongthebooks of Al-Juwalnlyy. lbnKathir, vol. XII, p. 128.

11 I-Titu.p.32.12 Hitu, p. 32.13 TahaJabir A1-’AlwanI, UsuI cil-Ftqh ol-IsIami, edrs. YusufTalal De

LorenzoandAS. Al-Shaikh-All (Herndon:The InternationalInstituteof Islamic Thought. 1990) p. 31.

14 Hitu. pp. 3—5.

40

AL-GHAZZALIYYS ThEORYOFKNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

Bw-han and Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote four books: Al-Mankhal,Tahdhtb al-Usa! (which is lost), Stujà’ al-GhaIil ft BayàrcMasdlLika1-Ta’lll, and al-Mustasfa.’5

In al-MankhQl,A1-Ghazzaliyy rankedjurisprudenceasthe most important field of knowledge.Yet, he statedthatjurisprudencewas a branch ffar~that could not be totallyapprehendedwithout understandingand mastering thefundamental (as!).’6 It is a clear messagethat promotedthe study of usul al-Jkjh for those who were interestedinstudyingjurisprudence.In the introduction of Al-Mankhül,A1-Ghazzaliyy reducedthe sourcesof knowledgeto thosedeclaredto be thefundamentalAofjurisprudenceaccordingto the school he belongedto (i.e. Shafl’Ite). Although allschoolslist the Al-Qur’an, the Sunnahand the consensusof thecompanionsofthe Prophets.a.w.asthe basicsourcesfor knowledge of the Shari’ah, these schools differed intheir position regarding the role of Ijtihãd. Similiar to theposition ofAl-Juwalniyy, Al-Ghazzaliyydid notconsidercri-teria that were derivedfrom {JIUIM asperemptory (qat‘tyg)and thuscould notbe consideredaspartof the fundamen-tals of jurisprudence:he would still use such criteria inverif~ringthevalidity of certainarguments.’7

In the introductionofAl-Mankhtd,Al-Ghazzaliyystatedthat the fundamentalsof jurisprudenceaimedat knowingthe peremptoryproofs regarding the requirementsof theShari’ah. In addition he defined the sourcesof which thepredictions (muqaddarnat) of the fundamentalsof juris-prudencewere derived as ‘Tim al-Kalam (scholastictheo-logy),’8 F’iqh (jurisprudence) and language,’9It should benotedthat thesesourcesare exactly the sameas those of

15 Hitu, pp. 8—9.16 A1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Mankhul. p. 3.17 Thfrl., pp. 4—S.18 ‘Em at-Kola,n,literally thescienceof talk or speech,buthereIt refersto

scholastic theology. Em al-Kalam is the method originally used intawhkl (theology) by Abu HasanAl-Ash’ariyy. Hewas followed by hisstudentlbn Mujahid who in turn wasfollowedby AI-Baqtllaniyy andafter him by Imani Al-HaramaynAl-~JuwathIyybeforeit reachedAl-Ohazzaliyy. Scholarswho followed this method becameknown asMatnkallimun(philosopher-theologians).Theinclusion of Aristotelianlogic in this methodled to sharpcriticism andrejectionfrom scholarswho belongedto different schools.Rejectionof logic and labelingIthnrarn (prohibited)is still advocatedby many.

19 Al-Ghazzallyy, AI-Mankhul. pp. 3-4.

41

AL-CHAZZLIYY

his teacherA1-Juwainiyy in his book al-Bui-han.2°The importanceof ‘urn al-Kalam in the developmentin

A1-Ghazzaliyy’sthoughtcanbe tracedto oneof its sources:Aristotelian logic. Al-Ghazzaliyy incorporatedlogic asa dis-tinct subjectin hiswritings. He renamedmanyAristotelianlogical categories;it seemsthat hedid soin orderto overcomethe rejectionof logic prevailing at the lime. In addition, heattemptedto show that theselogical categoriescould bederivedfrom the al-Qur’an and the Sunnah.2’A more de-tailed discussionof A1-Ghazzãliyy’sconfirmedcontributionto logic and its inclusion in UsUl al-flqh will follow when IdiscussAl-Mustasfamm ‘Jim al-UsEd.22

2.2.2 Al-QiyU.s (analogicalreasoning)

On the questionof qiyas (analogicalreasoning),al-Ghazzã-liyy statedthat the companionsof the Prophet [S.A.A.S.]used analogical reasoningwithout hesitation in solvingproblemswhenthereis no direct text in theQur’an andtheSunnahto addressthem.23ThecontextlnwhichAl-Ghazzaliyypresentedhis argumentsto supporthis position regardinganalogicalreasoningindicatesthathewason the defensive.It is a clearsign that therewerethosewho opposedtheuseof qiyd.s in the Shari’ah. In fact, A1-Ghazzaliyydiscussedthe position of the various schools of jurisprudencearidsectstowards qiya.s.

In the chapteron analogicalreasoning(kitab al-qiyas).

20 Al-Aiwani, p.49.21 One famousexample that AJ-Ghazzallyy cited in his book was the

Hadith in which prophet Muhammad [S.A.A.S.] askedMu’adh lbnJabalwhen he sent him to Yemen, “what areyou going to useforjudgement?He answered,“The book of Allah.” He (the prophet) said,What if you do not find (what you are looking for)”? He answered,‘Then by the Sunnah of Allah’s messenger-MayAllah’s peaceandprayersbeupon him.” Thenhesaid, “what if you donot find (whatyouarelooking for)”? He (Mu’adh) said. “I will usemy opinion (ajtahidura’yiy)’. He (theprophet) said,“PraiseAllah who guidedthemessengerof themessengerof Allah.’ This Hadithwasnarratedby Ahmad.Abu-Dawud and Al-Tirmldhlyy who statedthat the chain of narratorsofthis Hadith is incomplete. In addition, Al-Bukhariyy said that thisHadithis notsound,butneverthelesstherewerethosewho consideredit sound.Al-Ghazzaiiyy, AL-Mankhul,p. 331.

22 Seethis discussionon page145.23 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Mankhu[, p. 328—332.

42

AL-GHAZZALIYYS THEORYOF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

A1-Ghazzaliyy stated that qiyO.s was divided into purelyrational (‘aqliyy) and into that which wasdeducedfrom theQur’an and theSunnah (shariyy).24Most of the scholarsofjurisprudenceacceptedbothforms of qiya~.The Hanbaliteschool of jurisprudencerejected the ‘aqlmyy and acceptedthe shar’iyy.On theotherhand.aschoollike theDawUdiyyah25rejected the qiyds shar’iyy in favour of the qiyãs ‘aqliyy.Moreover, Al-Ghazzaliyy discussedthe position of severalsects including Al-Mu’tazilah which its leaderseither re-jectedthe qiyãs shar’iyy totally or most of it.2°In addition,one should note that the Zahirites were the only school ofjurisprudencewhich rejectedqiyás.A good exampleof thisrejectioncanbe seenin thewritings of Ibn Hazm.

2.2.3 .A1-Ghazzaliyy’sPosition on Scienceand Reasonin A1-Mankltul

A1-Ghazzaliyydevoteda chapterin Al-Martkhftl to a discus-sion of the natureof the sciences(al-Kalamfi Haqã’iq cr1-‘Ulum). It should be noted that Al-Ghazzaliyy’s use of theword “sciences” is generalandnot restrictedto the naturalor physical sciences; it covers all subjects of knowledgeincluding thoseof the Shari’ah. He startedthis chapterbycriticizing theposition oftheSophists(SfrJIstd’iyyah)regard-ing knowledgebecause“they deniedthe possibility of know-ing things in themselves”.Al-Gha.zzaliyy added that “oneshouldnot debatethem becausethey deniedsensibles(al-mahs(isErt)” •27 WhatAl-Ghazzaliyymeantwasthattherewasno point in starting a debatewith them becausethey haverejected the senseswhich include hearingwithout whichtherecould beno debatein the first place.

24 Al-Ghazzaliyy. A!-Mankhul, p. 324.25 The Dawudiyyab,alsoknownasA1-Zahiriyyah,followers of Dawud Ibn

‘All lbn Khalaf (d. 270 A.H./883 g.E.) who establisheda school ofjurisprudencethat only acceptedthe literal meaningof the Qu?anandtheSunnah.

26 Al-Nazzam (d. 221 A.H./836AD.) rejectedqigasshar’iyy totally. Thisposition of al-Nazzamis similar to thepositionof mostof Ai-KhawarijandmostAl-Rawafid. AbuHashimA1-Jubba’iyyrejectedmostof q4jasshar’iyy. Al-Ghazzaliyy, A(-Mankhul,pp. 324—326.

27 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Mankhu(, pp. 34-35.

43

AL-GHAZZALIYY

On the definition of science(‘tIm), Al-Ghazzaliyy listedsix different definitions including those of four famousscholarsalongwith hisargumentswhich underminedthemall. Al-Ghazzaliyyhada peculiar position towards science:he thoughtthat “sciencecannotbe defined” (irma at- ‘ilma 1crhar.Ida lab). Moreover,he explainedthat sciencecould beknown and that “our inability to define (science)does notindicateour ignoranceaboutthe samescience”.To explainhis point, Al-Ghazzaliyy said that it would be similar to hisbeing askedto defIne Musk perfume: while knowing whatIt is, he would notbe able to do so(i.e. provide a definition[hadd] of it). In addition, he maintainedthat sciencecouldbe distinguished in classification from opinion (zann)andskepticism(shakk).29

Al-Ghazzaliyydivided the sciencesor knowledge3°intoeternal (qadim) andaccidental (hadith). Eternal knowledgeis that of Allah (i.e. knowledgewhich Allah possesses).Thisknowledgehas no beginning and it encompassesall in-formation.3’ Furthermore, “it cannot be describedneitheras acquired nor as necessary(waltz yusaf bikawnihi kcxsbiyyari wald daruriyyari)”.32 Al-Ghazzaliyy divided acci-dental knowledge into Immediate (hajmiyy)33 and theore-deal (nazãriyy).The hajmiyy is that knowledgewhich onehas to (yadtarni) know with the beginning of reason (biawwal al- ‘aqO, like knowing the existenceof the self(wujüclal-dhat), pains and pleasures.On the other hand, theore-tical knowledge,which is acquired, is the result of soundthinking (an-nazaraI-sahih).34

28 Theyare:Abu Al-HasanA1-Ash’arlyy. AbuAl-QasimAl-lskafiyy (d. 452A.H./ 1060 CE.) who wasone of Imam Al-Haramayn’s teachers,IbnFawrakCd. 4O6A.H./ 1015cE.)andAl-BaqillaniyywhomAl-Ghazzaliyyrefer to astheJudge.Al-Ohazzaliyy, Al-Mankind, pp. 36—39.

29 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankhul, p. 40.30 Al-Ghazzaliyy usedscience(‘Urn) and knowledge(ma’r{fah) to indicate

thesameconcept.A1-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Mankind, p. 38.31 The scopeof Allah’s knowledge,whetherIt encompassesall knowledge

including detailsor not. led Al-Ghazzaliyy to dispute the positionofphilosopherslike Al-Farabi and Ibn Sina who claimed that Allah’sknowledgedid not comprisedetailsUuz’Eyyafl andeventuallydeclaredtheir positionassacrilegious.

32 Al-Ghazzallyy, At-Mankind, p. 42.33 The root of this wordis hajamawhich literally means“came aboutor

attackedsuddenly”.It seemsthatAl-Ghazzaliyyhereusedit toIndicatethat this kind of knowledgetakesplacequickly.

44

AL-GHAZZALIYY5 ThEORYOF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

On theessenceof reason(mdhiyyataI-’aql), Al-Ghazza-liyy listed the definitionsofjurists, Sufis andphilosophers;he wasnotcritical regardingall of them.Al-Baqillaniyy saidthat the essenceof reasonis knowing what is possibleandwhat is not. Al-Ghazzaliyy rejected this definition sayingthat someonewho wasunawareof the possibleandthe im-possiblecould still be rational (‘a.qil). In addition, Al-HarithAl-Muhãsibiyy, said that reasonwasan instinct (gharizah).This definitionwas mentionedwithout any comment.More-over, Al-Ghazzaliyylisted what he called the philosophers’definition without any comment.35He said that the philo-sophersdefinedreasonas the state in which the brain ispreparedfor the emanation(faydF6 of the soul, The mostimportant definition here is that of Al-Ghazzaliyy himselLHe definedreasonas “the qualification which enablesthequalified (person)to perceiveknowledgeand to think aboutthe eognizable”.37

Al-Ghazzaliyy had a peculiar classification of know-ledge. The rank of eachaspectof knowledgedependedonnecessity (darurah) and intuition (badihc4: the closest tonecessityand intuition would be the theclearestand thusrankedfirst. The following areAl-Ghazzaliyy’s ten levels ofknowledgein the orderthey appearin Al-MankhUt

1. The knowledgeof the existenceof the self (at- ‘ilm biwujüd al-dhalj, pain andpleasure.

2. Knowing the impossibility of the agreement ofcontradictions.

34 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Mankhul, pp. 42-43.35 Al-Ghazzaliyy’susageof theterm“philosophers’comprisesGreekand

Muslim philosopherssuch as Ibn Sina andAl-Farabi. Al-Ghazzaliyyprovided a more detailed account of the philosophers in TahaftttAl-FalasCfa (The Destruction of the Philosophers) and Al-MunqidhMiii Al-nataL

36 Emanation U’ayd) Is a neo-Platonlc idea that was entertainedbyvarious Muslim philosophersand especiallyby al-Farabi. The factthat Al-Ghazzaliyy left this notion without comment could beexplained by stating that Al-Ghazzailyy studied philosophy on hisown whenhe wasIn Baghdad, long after hewrote Al-ManlchuL Oneshould be aware of the useof anotherword to indicate emanationwhich is sudQr.

37 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankind. pp. 44-45. -

45

AL-G1-1AZZALIYY

3. Knowing the sensibles(aI-mahsUsãt).

4. The knowledgethat results from morethan onesourcereporting the samenews(akhbar al-tawatufj.

5. Understandinga message(khitab), and the ability toperceiveconditions that indicate shyness,anger andfear.

6. Knowledgeof crafts and industries.

7. Knowledgeof theories(nazbriyyat).

8. Knowing of the missionof the messengers(ofAllah) ~

9. Knowledge of miracles.

10. Knowledge that results from narrations (sam’iyytzt)which is “similar to imitation (taqlid).”3°

Analyzingtheabovelist, onecanseethatAl-Ghazzaliyy’sapproachwas developmental.He startedwith the clearestand mostnecessarynotion of knowledgeandproceededinthe direction of the more complex~The first level was therealization of the existenceof the self which he associatedwith pain andpleasure.The secondlevel of knowledgewaslogical necessities.In listing the first two levels of know-ledgebeforethe senses,Al-Ghazzaliyyindicated that thesetwo levelswere innate. However, in his A1-Munqidhmitt al-DalaI, thefirst two notionswere-notmentioned.Instead,thesenseswere ranked first.4°This shows that Al-Ghazzaliyywasrefining his sourcesof knowledgedueto hiscontinuedreflectionandinterestin epistemology.Thechangesin them-selvesareclearindicationsof thedevelopmentalaspectof his

38 It should be noted that the eighth level indicatesknowledgeof thenecessityof having messengersandthusdiffers from thefourth levelwhich is concernedwith knowledge that is transmitted from thosemessengersthroughmultiple chainsof narrators.

39 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankhul.pp. 46-48.40 A1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Munqidh.p. 144.

46

AL-GUAZZALIYY’S THEORY OFKNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

theory of knowledge.According to Al-Ghazzaliyy, the fourth sourceof know-

ledge, akhbãraI-tawtztur,wasa resultof a logical necessityand a conventionalagreement.The logical necessitycamefrom the notion that it is unlikely for a large number ofindependentnarratorsof the samenews (i.e. hadith) to lieabout it.4’ In the languageof the scholarsof Hadith, theaboveideais called “the impossibility of (having) a conspi-racy to lie” (istihalat al-tawtztu’ ‘ala al-kadhib). The conven-tional aspectcamein answerto the following question:howmanynarratorswere neededin order to rendera narrationas mutawtztiO42The importanceof this source of know-ledge could be realized from the fact that Muslim scholarsregardeda hadith which wasconsideredmutawtztiron thesamelevel asthe Qur’an in terms of certitude.

The fifth kind of knowledgewas analytical. Al-Ghaz-zaliyy wasnot the only one to talk about analytical know-ledgethat resultedfrom written texts; he also talked aboutanalytical knowledgethat could be derivedfrom facial ex-pressions.While he did notprovideexamplesof the former,he listed shyness,angerandfear asexamplesof the latter.The sixth and seventh level could be described as thepractical and theoretical knowledgerespectively.~3

The last three kinds of knowledge, which includedknowing the mission of the prophets,miraclesand know-ledge that was basedon authority (taqlld), wereall directlyrelatedto religion. Taqtid differs from khabw-al-tawatur inthe methodologyone adopts in verifying the transmittedknowledge;in thecaseof taqtidthereis anuncriticalaccept-anceof knowledge(i.e. hadith), while In khabar at-tawaturone is critical about the methodologyof transmitting thehadith. In addition, taqtid or knowledgeof miraclescould berelated to khabar al-dho.dwhere the number of narrators

41 To qualify for acceptance,those narrators should meet very strictcriteria in moral characterand memory. Al-Tahhan, Mustalah at-HadIt Ii, p. 109.

42 A hadith is consideredmutawatir if it was narratedby at least tennarratorsin eachgeneration(tabaqah).In addition. thecircumstancesof thesenarratorsshould be such that It is impossiblefor them toconspireto lie (istihalat tawatu’hum ‘ala at-Kadhlb). Ai-Tabhan, Mus-talahal-Hadith, pp. 17—18.

43 AJ-Ghazzaliyy,At-Mankind, p. 47.

47

AL-GHAZZALIYY

is lessthanthat of khabai-at-tawatur. Al- Ghazzaliyy’slistingof the knowledge of miracles as a separateentity mightindicatehis early preoccupationwith this idea,althoughhedid not explainhis own position until he respondedto theMuslim philosophers’ notion of causality in Tahãfut al-Fa1as~[ah(The Incoherenceof thePhilosophers).44By classi-fying taqlid as the last kind of knowledge, Al-Ghazzàliyyhinted that he consideredit the least clear on his list. Itshouldcomeasno surprise, therefore,that the fir st sourceof knowledgethat he gaveup beforehis periodof skepticismwas taqtid.45

Al-Ghazzäliyy later revisedthis list and cameup witha list of thirteencategoriesof knowledgethat wereusedbythe philosophersaspremisesin the sectionon logic in hisMaqasida1-Fa1às~fah(The Alms of the Philosophers)whichhe wrote in Baghdadwhen he assumedhis professorialposition at the Nizamiyyah. Al’Ghazzaliyy listed thesecategoriesin the following order:

1. A1-Uwwaliyyat(logical necessities):e.g., knowing that“the whole is greaterthan the part”.

2. A1-Mahsüsat(sensibles):e.g., “the light of the moonincreasesanddecreases”.

3, A1’Tajribiyyàt(experlmentals):theyresultfromthesensesand reasontogether,e,g., “the fire bums”.

4. A1-Mutawãtiràt(knowledgerelatedby agroup of narra-tors): “like our knowledgeof the existenceof EgyptandMakkah without seeingthem”,

5. A1-Qadãyaal-Lati QiyàsÔhdiaft at-Tab’ Ma’ahã (thecasesthat include their proofswithin): premisesthatwere treated as logical necessitiesbecause theirproofs wereforgottenwith time asthe premise“two Ishalf four” which originally was known through theproof “the half is one of two parts of a whole that isequalto the other”.

44 For afull discussionof A1-Ghazzaliyy’sunderstandingof causalityandmiraclesseepage85.

45 SeeAl-Ghazzaliyy, .At-Munqtdh.p. 77.

48

AL-GHAZZALIYYS ThEORYOFKNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

6. At-Wahmiyyãt (hypothetical): like the premise “it isimpossiblefor somethingto exist if one cannotpointto it and it is describedas being neither Inside noroutsidethis world”.

7. At-Mashhürat (famous):as in the caseof “lying is bad”.Al-Ghazzaliyy said that this categorycomprisedcon-ventional notionsthatweregood for practical reasons,He addedthat if therewere a man who was rationalyet notaccustomedto anything,hemight rejectfamouspremises.

8. At-Maqbütat(acceptables):premisesthatwereacceptedby virtue of the position of the person who providedthem (i.e. scholars).

9. At-Musaltamàt(agreeables):premisesthatwereagreedupon betweentwo parties.

10. At-Mushabbthat(similars):premisesthat only appearedto be correspondingto al-Uwwaliyyãt, at-Tajribiyyator at-Mashhürat but in reality they werenot.

11. A1-MashhürätFi-At-ZO.hir (thosethat appearto be fa-mous):premisesthatwereacceptedastrueuponhear-ing them,but renderedfalseuponreflecting on them.

12. A1-Maznunãt(probables):premisesthat wereacceptedastruewith the“feeling that the oppositeIs possible”.

13. A1-Makhitãt(imaginatives):premisesthat were knownto be falseyet they were influential psychologically.~

In Mi’yär al-’Ilmfi al-Mantiq (TheCriterion ofScienceinLogic), Al-Ghazzállyy maintainedbasicallythe samelist asaboveexceptfor theadditionof anewcategorywhláhwasAl-Hadsiyyat (intuitions). He explained the knowledge thatresulted from intuition as that which “cannot be proved,

46 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Maqasidal-F’alas(fah,SulaimanDunya. ed. (cairo: Daral-Ma’arlf Bi-Misr, 1961)pp. 102—109.

49

AL-GHAZZALIYY

cannotbedoubtedandcannotbesharedwith othersthrougheducation”. Al-Ghazzaliyy did not provide examples ofthis kind of knowledge,but he hinted that it is similar tothe caseof knowledgethat is acquiredby “taste” dhawq. Hemaintainedthatonecould only leadthestudentto the paththat he chose,but it is up to the student’sability to achievesuchknowledge.47

Moreover, Al-Ghazzaliyydiscussedthe differencesbe-tween the senses,whether they are on the samelevel orwhether some rank higher than others. He cited severalpositions without statinghis own thoughton this subject.It should be noted that in At-Munqidh mitt al-Dalol (Deli-verancefrom Error), which he wrote towardsthe endof hislife, Al-Ghazzaliyy becamevery clear about this issue;heranked the senseson different levels in the order of theirdevelopmentand by virtue of this classificationthey werelisted assourcesof sensibleknowledge.8

Al-Ghazzãliyy concluded his classification of know-ledgeby statingthat therewereno differencesbetweenthesciencesonce knowledge is acquired, regardlessof howdifficult the subjectof the sciencewas.49This view of Al-Ghazzaliyyregardingtheequality of the sciences,oncetheyare achieved,is compatiblewith his position regardinghisinterchangeableuse of the terms “science” and “know-ledge”.~° Nevertheless,one could still find contradictiononthe surfacebetweenthe above notion andthe fact that Al-Ghazzaliyy listed various levels of knowledge in differenttexts, a procedurethat startedwith Al-Mankhfzlandconti-nuedthrough outhis life. It is rather obviousthat in suchlists, heclassifieddifferentcategoriesof sciencesleavingtheimpressionthat somearemorescientific thanothers.As tothe changesin the number of these categories,one canattribute them to the developmentin his understandingoftheconceptof sciencewhich could beattributedpartially tohis exposureto philosophy.

47 A1-Ghazzaliyy. Mi’yar at-tim ft al-Mantiq, Ahmad ShamsAl-Din, ed.Beirut: DarAl-Kutub Al-’Ilmiyyah, 19901p. 182.

48 A1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Munqldh,pp. 144—145.49 AI-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankhul, p. 48.50 Seefootnote30.

50

AL-Cl IAZZALIYY’S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

2.2.4 The Sourcesof Knowledge

Prior to statinghis positionon thesourcesof knowledge,Al-Ghazzaliyycitedsome positionsthat werecirculatingat thetime. Hestartedwith Al-Hashawiyyah5’who’s view wasthatthesourcesof knowledgewererestricted to the Qur’an andtheSunnahwithout any role for reason.Al-Ghazzaliyysaidthat this positionwas obviouslyfalse.52Although onecouldunderstandthe backgroundof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s statementregardingthe Hashawiyyah,it was insufficient on his partnot to providea full accountof hisposition.Of course,thereis the possibility that Al-Ghazzaliyy thought it was self-evident.

In addition, he listed the ideasof those who restrictedthe sourcesof knowledgeto the senses,the stanceof theIndian philosopherswho thought that the sourceswerethinking and meditation and the position of those whoconsideredinspiration (ilham) asthe sourceof knowledge.The latter position wasbasedupon the ideathat all know-ledge belongedto Allah in the first place and then it ispassedto human beings. Furthermore,he mentionedtheopinionof Al-Qalanislyy who restrictedthe sourceof know-ledgeto reason(‘aqi) without rejectingthe senses.Forhim,thefunction ofthe sensesis to perceive,but it is reasonthatknowsatthe timethesensesperceive(I.e. light).Themeaningof this is that Al-Qalanisiyy sawthe sensesas tools thatcannotcomprehendwhattheyperceiveontheir own.Hetriedto supporthisargumentby giving anexampleof a child whoperceivesthe perceptibleswithout knowing what they arefor his lack of reason.

Al-Ghazzãliyybrought the abovediscussionto an endby assertingthat rational discernment(miz) wasthe sourceofknowledge.Heheldthat thereis a levelof discernmentthatbelongedto animalswhichdid notyield anyknowledge.53Al-

51 Ai-Hashawlyyah was a sect that acceptedonly the literal meaningofthe versesof the al-Qur’an and Hadiths that mentioned Allah inlanguagethat would add corporealattributesto Allah. ,Al-Ghazzaiiyy,At-Mankhut. p. 49.

52 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankhu&p. 50.53 Ibid.

51

AL-GHAZZALIYY

Ghazzãliyyusedthe term “rational discernment”to distin-guish human discernmentfrom the ability of animals todiscern54betweenthings following their instincts. In addi-tion, he ranked discernmenthigher than other facultiesinAl-Mankhül. In his latter work Al-Munqidh, he ranked dis-cernment,which he called tamyiz. higher than the sensesbut lower than reason.55

Ai-Ghazzãliyyheld thatthereweretwo waysto acquireknowledge,with or without instrumentsof mediation (wa-sã’it). According to A1-Ghazzâliyy,therewere threekindsofmedia: the senseswhich were the source of the sensibles(al-rnahsüsât),the“look” ofthemind which wasthesourceofthe rational (at- ‘aqliyyät) and the consistency of habits(ittirdd at- ~adãt)which enablesoneto know the meaningofmessages.Thelatterwasimportantfor Al-Ghazzaliyyin de-fining the notion of causality and thusexplaining miracleswhich neededtwo media:reasonandhabits.Al-Ghazzaliyyused these ideasin proving the possibility of miracles insupport of the conceptof prophecy.He said that throughreasonone could fInd that the miracle Is an activity of aninventor andmakerwho Is in control. He addedthat it wasthroughcustomor habit that miraclesindicatetheveracityof the Prophet[S.A.A.S.156

2.2.5 A1-Ghazzaliyy’sTheory of language

In a longsectionofAl-Martkhüt,A1-Ghazzãllyydiscussedthetheories concerningthe origin of languages.He listed twomajor views about how languagesevolved. The first advo-catedtheideathat language,like anyotherknowledge,camefrom Allah directly. Thosewho held this view basedtheirthoughtuponaversein theQur’anwhichsaysthatAllah hadtaughtAdam all the names,57The secondopinion assertedthat languageswere conventional. Those of the firststancerefuted the latter position by declaring the word“conventional” paradoxical.

54 Ai-Ghazzallyy used the sameArabic term tomglz (discernment)forboth humanbeingsandanimals.

55 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, AbMunqidh.p. 145.56 A1-Ghaizallyy,AI-Mankhul, p. 51.57 ‘Wa’allama Ado.mnal-asma’akulloim ... al-Qur’an, Sura al-Baqaraft

2:31.

52

AL-GHAZZALIYYS ThEORYOF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

A1-Ghazzaliyybroughtthis discussionto aculminationby reconciling the two positions together.It could be thatlanguageat its beginning was conventional; this conven-tional beginning could havebeenmade possibleby othercreatures who were createdbefore Adam. Al-Ghazzaliyymaintainedthat the abovementioned verse “appeared” toindicatethe non-conventionalityof languagebut it wasnotdecisive.58

2.3 DELIVERANCE FROM ERROR(AI-Munqidh mm aI-DalaIJ

According to Al-Subkiyy, Al-Ghazzaliyy spent about eightyears (470-478A.H./1077-1085C.E.) in Nishapurwith Al-Juwainiyy.5°At the time Al-Juwainiyy died Al-Ghazzaliyywas atleast20 yearsold. Theimportanceof thesedatesandAl-Ghazzaliyy’s agestemfrom an accountof Al-Ghazzaliyy’sthought in his autobiographicalwork Al-Munqidh mitt at-Data! which, although written towards the end of his life,included useful information about the developmentof hisepistemologyduring his earlylife which fits the frameworkof thischapter.At thebeginningof Al-Munqidh,hedescribeshis stateof mind startingwith the prime of his youthwhenhe ‘reached puberty (al-bulügh), before becomingtwenty”,until hebecamemorethanfifty yearsold.6°It is obviousthathis timeframe covers the periodwhenAl-Ghazzaliyywrotehisbook Al-MartkhUl mitt Ta‘1 iqat al-Usat.

In al-Muttqidh, Al-Ghazzaliyy showedthat early in hislife he was aware of the differencesbetween the variousreligions,sectsandschoolsofjurisprudence.Thisawarenesspromptedhim to “investigatethe creedof every sectand toexplorethe secretsof every denomination”. In addition, hestudied the Batinites, Zahirites, philosophers, dialecticaltheologians (mutakallirrtan), Sufis and Manicheans (za-riadiqa).°’Al-Ghazzàliyy realizedat a very early stagethat

58 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Mankhul, pp. 70-71.59 A1-Subkiyy. vol. VI, p. 196.60 Al-Ghazzaliyy. al-Munqidh. p. 79.61 Zonathqahalsomeansatheists,but generallyin medievalsciencesit

referred to Manicheanswho werenot atheists.

53

AL-GHAZZALIYY

onemajorreasonfor thesedifferenceswasauthority.Forhimit was parentsand teacherswho wereresponsiblefor suchdifferences.Al-Ghazzâliyy sawthat “children of Christianswere raisedas Christians, children of Jewswere raisedasJewsandchildren of Muslims wereraisedasMuslims”.62

As a result,Al-Ghazzaliyywantedto prescindfrom theknowledgethat wasbasedon the authority of parentsandteachers.He had ~‘athirst to perceivethe reality of things”which led him to break away from imitating others. Al-Ghazzaliyyrealizedthat in orderto reachtruth, heneededto“seek the reality of knowledge,as it is”?63

2.4 CONCLUSION

Comparingthe languageof al-Mankhñlto thatofAt-Munqidh,one finds a big difference. In Al-MarzkhUl, Al-Ghazzaliyy’sbasicinterestin knowledgewasmainly asajurist. He con-centratedon technical issuesthat werepartof or relatedtousEd at-fiqh. Oneexampleof a technical issuewasAl-Ghaz-zaliyy’s discussionof the conditions of the narrators ofHadith. He saidthatthe narratorhasto bea rational adultMuslim who could be male or female, free or a slave. For anarratorwho fits theseconditions,only questionsof immo-rality render his/her narration unacceptable.TMAnotherissue that Al-Ghazzãliyy dealt with was the position ofIslamic Sharl’ah towards the Shari’ah of the prophetsbefore Islam. The question that underlines this area ofdiscussion Is whether Muslim jurists should considerprevious Shari’ah as another source in addition to theQur’an, Sunnah,consensusof the companionsof the pro-phet [S.A.A.S.], which lateronbecamethe consensusof thescholars, and qigas (analogy). He started by discussingwhether prophet Muhammad[S.A.A.S.] was following anypreviousSharl’ahbeforehebecamea prophet.After settingforth the positionsfor severalother scholars,Al-GhazzaliyybroughttheIssuetoaculminationbystatingthatonecannotconsidertheShari’ahof pastreligionsasasourceof IslamicShari’ahbecausetherewas no referenceto suchnotions in

62 Al-Ghazzaliyy, AI-Munqidh, pp. 78-82.63 IbId., p.82.64 Al-Ghazzaliyy. At-Mankhul,p. 257.

54

AL-GHAZZALIYYS THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

the Sunnahof prophetMuhammadIS.A.A.S.]65It shouldnotcomeasasurprisethat, asa student,Al-

Ghazzaliyy imitated his teacherAl-Juwainiyy, a positionthat heacknowledgedat theendof Al-Marrkhtd. Although hedifferedin very fewcasesfrom his teacherin Al-Manichftl, hisoriginality in usEdal-fiqh was manifestedin his later workAl-Mustasfawherelogic playeda major role in his usEd.

In Al-Munqidh,Al-GhazzaliyyIs preoccupiedwith truthin itself. He did not referto jurisprudenceor the usEd.WhileusEd al-fiqh, and thus Al-MankhEd, was supposedto solvedifferencesinjurisprudence,it wasdifferencesin beliefthatpromptedAl-Ghazzaliyyto searchfor truth. His awareness,during the early stagesof his life, of the different creedsofpeoplestarted him on his first stageof a long journey ofsystematicskepticismwhich lasteduntil the climax of hisquestfor knowledgeduring his last daysat the Nizamiyyahof Baghdad.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s critical thinking andregardto generalquestions of truth and knowledge, while apparentin Al-Munqidh Is absentfromAl-Mankhfd.The factthat thesetwobooksreflecteddifferentareasof interestin Al-Ghazzaliyy’searly life might appearcontradictory. One question thatmight surfaceas a result of thesetwo areasIs: how couldsomeonelike Al-Ghazzaliyy,who was investigatingthe ge-neral notions of knowledgeand their sourcesas statedinAl-Munqidh, proceededto veriI~’the particularas the caseIn Al-Marikhul?

Therecould be oneanswer,I argue,that explainstheabovementionedpositions.Al-Ghazzallyy maintainedtwolines of thought sincethe daysof youth until the lastyearsof his life. The first line of thought, which representsAl-Ghazzaliyy’s questfor knowledge,is best illustrated in thefollowing lines from the introductionof Al-MunqIdit’

“In thebloomof my life, from thetimeI reachedpubertybeforeI wastwentyuntil now,whenlamoverfifty, I haveconstantlybeendiving daringly into the depthsof thisprofoundseaandwadinginto its deepwaterlike aboldman,not like acautiouscoward.I would penetratefar

65 A1-Ghazzaliyy.AI-Mankhul, pp. 23 1-234.

55

AL-GHAZZALIYY

into everymurky mystery, pounceupon everyproblem,and dash into every mazydifficulty. I would scrutinizethecreedof everysectandseekto lay barethesecretsofeachfaction’steachingwith the aim of discriminatingbetween the proponent of truth and the advocateoferror, and betweenthe faithful follower of tradition andthe heterodox innovator.”~

Al-Ghazzaliyy reaffirmed the early beginning of thissearchfor truth and the sourceof this questfor knowledgein the sameintroduction. He said:

“The thirst for graspingthe realmeaningof thingswasindeedmy habitandwont from my earlyyearsand inthe prime of my life. It was an instinctive, naturaldis-positionplacedin my makeupby God(Allah) MostHigh,notsomethingdueto my own choosingandcontriving.As aresult, the fettersof servile conformism (taqtid)°7fell away from me,and inheritedbeliefslost their holdon me,when I was still quiteyoung.””8

Although the abovequotationsshowedthetime frameof the first line of thought, which coveredAl-Ghazzaliyy’slife asa student,it remainsthat therewereno bookswrittenby the studentAl-Ghazza]iyy, that reflected this indepen-dent approachto knowledgeand truth. There were manyworks (e.g. At-Muriqidh mitt al-DaWO by the later Al-Ghaz-zaliyy that embodiedthis investigativecoursethat heunder-took in pursuit of knowledgeand truth in what could becalledthe areaof universals.

The second line of thought is representedin Al-Ghazzaliyy’sworksin fieldslikejurisprudence.Althoughthefirst line of thought must have influenced the way Al-Ghazzaliyyapproachedareaslike fiqh by having that inde-pendent spirit which led him not to be a conformist topreviouswritings in suchfields, onecannotclaim that these

66 ALGhazzaliyy, Freedom and Fi4fdlment (At-Munqidh mitt aI-Da[aQ,Richard Joseph Mccarthy, tr. (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 19801p. 62.

67 For PJ-Ghazzaliyy,conformismor taqUt! meantuncritical acceptanceof knowledge and belief at the hands of parents and teachersbyvirtue of their authority.

68 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Freedom,p. 63.

56

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S THEORYOF KNOWLEDGE AS A STUDENT

works were reflecting the first line of thoughtbecausetheywere concernedwith particulars.Unlike a reductionist, headdressedtheseareasof particulars as if therewas no re-lationshipbetweenthegeneralnotionsof knowledge,whichhe put under investigation,and theseparticular fields.

The fact that Al-Ghazzaliyykeptworking in the parti-cular fields of the Shari’ah indicatesthat he was never indoubt about the true validity of the premiseswhich werederivedfromtheQur’anandtheSunna.In fact, hecontinuedlecturing on thesesubjectsevenat the Nizamiyyahof Bagh-dad,whenhewasgoingthroughwhat I like to call theclimaxof his mentaldiscourseregardingthe first line of thought.69

Al-Ghazzãliyy’s continuous inquiry into both univer-sals andparticulars is interestingbecauseon the surfacethey seemincompatible.One could seethat Al-Ghazzaliyyhad an obvious, spontaneousinterest in the first. Itprompteda good deal of reflection throughouthis life. Thedifficulty is in thequestion:why did he pursuethe second?Part of the answercould be found in Al-Ghazzaliyy’s formaleducationwhich started with training in the particulars(e.g.fiqh). Another partial answercomesfrom the fact thattherewas common interest in theseparticular sciences,especiallyin jurisprudence.In addition,Al-Ghazzaliyypur-suedhis interest in the particulars as a teacherwho wasexpected,and thus there is a senseof duty, to lecture onsuch topics. All of these aspects and probably moreprovided the motivation for such pursuit of knowledgeinthe particulars. Moreover, one could think that onceAl-Ghazzaliyy achieved universal knowledge, he found thathis interestin the particulars was in line with his interestin theuniversals.In addition, thereis asociologicalelementin this equation,where a scholar in the Islamic world isunlikely to beacceptedwithoutbeingdeeprootedandhavingstrong interestIn the particulars.

69 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Munqidh,p. 136.

57

Chapter THREE

AL-GHAZZALfl’Y’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE FIRST PERIOD OF PUBLIC TEACHING(478-488A.H./1085-1095C.E.)

This chapterdealswith Al-Ghazzaliyy’s writings from thetime of the deathof Al-Juwalniyy in 478 A.H./1085 C.E.until he abandonedhis professorialposition at the Niza-miyyah of Baghdadin 488A.H./1095 C.E.

During this period. A1-Ghazzaliyywrote at leasttwentybooks In addition to the written rulings (fatawa) that heissued during the sameperiod. Thesewritings, many ofwhich were lost or remain in manuscript form,’ coveredseveral subjects including jurisprudence (fiqh). debates(rnunazarah) in flqh, fundamentalsof jurisprudence(UsülAI-Fiqh), philosophy, politics andcreed (‘aqiciah). In thischapter, I shall concentrateon his works In areas thatpertainto his questfor true knowledgedirectly (i.e. philoso-phy). Otherswill be treatedbriefly.

In addition, it Is necessaryto alsotreatAl-Ghazzaliyy’sAl-Munqidhmm aI-Dal&1 in this chapter.Although thisworkwas written during the secondperiod of public teaching(499 A.H./ 1106 C.E.-503A.H./ 1110 C.E.), It includes oneof the most importantaccountson his thoughtduring theperiod leadingto his departurefrom Baghdad.Thisaccountcovershis skepticismIn addition to his analysisof the me-

1 The writings that were lost include Al-Muntahal ft ‘flm al-JadalMa’akhldh al-Khilaf. TOMSUI al-Ma’akhidh. Al-Mabadi’ iou al-Ghayat,HujIat al-Haq and Qawaslmol-Batinlyyah.The manuscriptscompriseAl-Basit. Khukzsat al-Mukhtasar Wa Naqawatai-Mu’tasar, Shtfa’ at-GhaUtft al-Qigas Wat-TaUl. Fatawa, Ghoyol aI-Ghawr ft Dlrayat at-DawrandAl-Ma’arif a!- Aqliyyah WaLubabal-Hikmo.hal-Ilahiyyah.

59

AL-GHAZZALIYY

thodologiesof the four “classesof seekers”: the dialecticaltheologians(Al-Mutakallimun) , theesoterics(Al-Bãtirtiyyah),the philosophersand the Sufis. The pertinence of theseissuesto A1-Ghazzaliyy’s developmentduring this decadewill be examinedin detail in this chapter.

3.1 ON P19K, MUNAZARAIIAND USULAL-FIQH

Al-Ghazzaliyy’sworks injurisprudenceand therelatedsub-jects show his continuing interestin this field, an interestwhich startedin his studentdays.Although theseworksreflect a certaindevelopmentin Al-Ghazzaliyy’s perspectiveon jurisprudence,he remained throughoutfaithful to theShãfi’ite schoolof jurisprudence.

3.1.1 On Jurisprudence

Al-Ghazzaliyywrote severalbooksoffiqh, accordingto theShafi’ite school, during the time regardedby MauriceBouygesasthe first period of his public teaching(478—488A.H./ 1085—1095C.E.) ~2 Thesebooks,whichwereconsideredhis first writings, include Al-Bath, Al-Wasit, Al-Wajiz andKhulasatAl-Mukhtasar. In addition, he issuedtensof sepa-rate rulings (fatàwa) In the areaoffiqh. One hundredandninety of these rulings were gatheredin one manuscriptwhich remainsunpublished.3

lbn Khallikan statedthat Al-Ghazzaliyyborrowed thenamesof the first three books, in the sameorder, fromAl-Wahidiyy Al-Mufassi? (d. 468 A.H./1074 C.E.) whowrote threebookson the interpretationof the Qur’an.5

These three books of A1-Ghazzaliyy were practicallythesameasoneanother.Thefirst in theserieswasAl-Basit(The Simple). Realizing that this book included unne-cessarydetails and exampleswhich made it difficult for

2 Badawi, p. xvi.3 mEd.,p. 46.4 ‘All Ibn HasanIbn AhmadIbn ‘All lbn Buwayh Al-Wahldiyy. He diedin

Nishapurwhen Al-Ohazzallyy was stuydlng there, which explainstheborrowing.

5 Ibn Kathir, vol. ii, p. 114.

60

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE...PUBLIC TEAcHING

studentsto read,A1-Ghazzaliyydecidedto write a shorterversion which he called Al-Wasit (The Median). Accordingto him, Al-Wask, which was written as a textbook, is halfthe size of Al-Bath. In addition, A1-Ghazzaliyy set forth arule for writing when he explicitly said that “deciding thegoal (of a book) should be accordingto the ability of thestudent”,6 This rule reflects A1-Ghazzaliyy’s exceptionaltalent as an educator. Later on, Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote afurtherabridgementwhichhenamedAl-Wajiz (TheConcise).

The fourth book that Al-Ghazzallyy wrote on juris-prudenceduring this period was Khulasat Al-Mukhta.sar(TheExtract of theCompendium).This bookwassimply anabridgment of the Mukhtasar of AI-Muzanlyy (d. 264A.H./878 C.E.).7Al-Murtada A1-Zubaydiyy statedthat Al-Ghazzaliyydid notwork directly on the original book of Al-Muzaniyy, but rather on an intermediatework which wasalso an abridgmentwritten by Al-Juwalniyy (d. 438 A.H./1047 CE.), father of Imam A1-Harãmayn Al-Juwalniyy,teacherof Al-Ghazzaliyy.8According to Al-Ghazzaliyy. thisbookwashis smallestcontributionto jurisprudence.0

The contributions of A1-Ghazzaliyy in fiqh are to beexpected.Mter all, his position at the Nizarniyyah schoolwasgiven only to scholarsof the Shafi’Ite school of juris-prudence. It was apparentfrom his writings in firjh thatthey were intendedas textbooks.Al-Ghazzaliyy dedicatedmostof his time to teachingandwriting. He usedhis “sparetime” to pursue the goal that he designatedfor himself:his questfor true knowledge.’°

3.1.2 On the Methods of Debate

A1-Ghazzallyy wrote four books on debates in the field ofjurisprudence Al-Murttahal ft ‘lint al-Jadal, Ma’akhldh al-

6 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Al-Wasit, All Muhyid-Din Al-Qarah Daghi, ed. (cairo:Dar al-NasrIi al-Tiba’ah al-Islamiyyah.1984)vol. i, p. 296.

7 Abu lbrahlm Ismail A1-Muzaniyy, a companIonof ai-Shafl’iyy. Thefull title of hIs book isMukhtasoj-mm ‘Emal-Imam al-NafisMuhammadEm Idris.

8 Abu Muhammad‘Abdallah Ibn YusufAl-Juwainiyy.9 Badawl.p.31.

10 A1-Ghazzaiiyy,AI-Munqidh, p. 95.

61

AL-GHAZZALIYY

KhiIaf Lubab al-Nazar and TOJIS&L al-Ma’ãkhtdh were allwritten as a result of a trend dominant in his time. Con-cerningthat trend, he said in Mi’yar al- ‘lInt

“Becauseaspirationsduring our agewere almost ex-clusively inclined to Jurisprudence.I was led to writebooksin themethodsof debate,(al-Munäzara),”

The fact that Al-Ghazzallyywrote many books on de-bate,andthat he spentmuchtime in debatingothersatthe“Camp” of Nizam Al-Mulk, show his personalinterest indebateswhich could not be considered,strictly speaking,part of his quest for knowledge. AI-Ghazzaliyy held thatunless the debatingparties adheredto etiquetteof debate(adabaI-munazarah)ashe outlinedin his books,thesede-bateswould lead to animosity and hatred.’2 It seemsthatA1-Ghazzãllyydid notconsiderdebateto be a very positiveactivity. Indeed, when his visited the tomb of prophetIbrahim [a.s.] in Hebronafter his departurefrom Baghdad,which marked a new era in his thought, Al-Ghazzallyydespiseddebatingandmadea pledgeneveragainto debatewith anyone.’3

3.1.3 On the Fundamentalsof Jurisprudence

On Usulal-Fiqh. Al-Ghazzaliyywrote two booksduring thesameperiod: Al-Mabadi’ WaI-Ghayatand Sh~fa’Al-GhaLRfi Al-Qiyas wa al-Ta’ld, The first book was lost, andwhatlittle information thereis about it comesfrom two referencesin other writings of Al-Gha.zzaliyy. Badawi claimed thesubjectof Al-Mabadi’ wa aI-Ghayatwas usul al-fiqh. Sucha claim was disputed,but given the scantinformation, Itis virtually Impossibleto settle the debate regardingevenIts subjectmatter.

There are many manuscripts of the second book,Sh!fã’ al-’AlüJt aI-Qiyas wa aI-Ta’lil, which was edited by

11 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mt’yar al-Em,p. 27.12 QadriHailzTuqan.Al-’Ulum ‘indal-Arab(Beirut: Darlqra’, 1983)p. 189,13 QarahDaghl, vol.!, p. 118,14 This book waspublishedby Dar al-IrshadIn Baghdadin 1971. Qarah

Daghi, p 202.

62

AL-GHAZZALIYY5 QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE.. PUBLIC TEACI-IING

HamadAl-Kabisi.’4 Although this bookwasunique In com-parison to other books on the fundamentalsof jurispru-dence, still it did not rise to the level which al-Mustasfareachedlater. The latter incorporatedlogic as a separateentity, which marked an especially important stage inthe developmentof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s thought. A full accountof al-MustasJàwill be providedin chaptersix.

3.2 AL-GRAZZALIYY’S SKEPTICISM

In AI-Murtqidh mm al-Dalal, A1-Ghazzallyy stated that hebroke away from conformism (taqlid) which he understoodas accepting knowledge as true based upon the authorityof parents and teachers. He found this authority to beunreliable becauseit could not be the case that parentswere providing true knowledge while at the same timebeing responsiblefor the differencesamong children (i.e.amongtherearingof Jews,Christiansor Muslims).’5

As a result, Al-Ghazzaliyy sought to distinguish bet-weentrue andfalseknowledge.To do that, he realizedthathe should determinethe nature of true knowledge. In astatementthat reflectedhis appreciationof mathematics,A1-Ghazzallyy said that primary knowledge should beindubitable in the sameway as mathematics(eg. ten Isgreaterthan three))6

Next, Al-Ghazzaliyy scrutinized all his cognitions insearchfor knowledgethatwould meetthepreviousdescrip-tion, but he found himself devoid of any such knowledgeexcept in the case of sensibles(al-hissiyydt)’7 and the selfevident truths (al-darUriyyaO.’°Although these two areasappearedclear and assuring, Al-Ghazzaliyy wanted to

15 A1-OhazzaiI~,aI’Munqidh, pp. 81-82.16 Al-Ghazzaliyy, al-Mwiqidh, p. 82.17 In his translationof al-Munqidhmmal-Dalal, Freedomand Fulfillment,

R. J. Mccarthy used “sense-data”to translate “a&hlssyyar. It wasBertrand Russellwho wasfirst to use“sense-data”linguistIcally toexpressthecontentsofsensations.ForRussell,thereIsan elementofimmediacy assocIatedwith the conceptof “sense-data”which Al-Ghazzaliyy’sideaof sensibles(hissygat) lacks.Thus, I havedepartedfromMccarth~stranslation.

18 Al-Ghazzallyy. FreedomandFulfillment (al-Munqldh).p. 64

63

AL-GHAZZALIYY

make sure that he did not havea false senseof securitylike the one he had previously with knowledgethat he re-ceivedfrom parentsandteachers.’9

With great seriousness,Al-Ghazzaliyy started medi-tating on sensiblesand self evidentknowledge.He wantedto seewhether he could doubt them. As a result, heconcluded:

“This protracted effort to induce doubt (tashakkuk)finally brought me to the point where my soul wouldnot allow me to admit safety from error even in thecase of sensibles. It beganto give ground to doubt(tattasi’u Ushshak) and to say: Whence comes yourrelianceon sensibles?”2°

In a rather beautiful style, A1-Ghazzãliyy presentedthesereflections in the form of dialoguewith his personi-fied soul which brought to his attention examplesfromsight, the strongestof the sensibles.in order to provethathecouldnot rely onthesenses.Oneexamplewasthecaseofshadowwhere sight “looks at shadowand seesit standingstill and motionless and judges that motion must bedenied.Then due to experienceand observation,an hourlaterit (thesoul) knowsthat theshadowis moving, andthatit did not move in a suddenspurt, but so gradually andimperceptibly that it was never completely at rest”. Hissoul showedhim that on this and similar sensibles,thesense-judge(hakimnal-hiss) deemedthem to be true. ButSoon, the reason-judge(hakim al- ‘aqi) “refutes It and re-peatedlygivesIt the lie in an incontrovertiblefashion” 21

After doubting sensibles.Al-Ghazzaliyydescribeshim-self as provisionally thinking that he could only trustrational data (al-‘aqliyyat) which belong to primary truths(al-uwwaliyydt). These primary truths would consist ofmathematicaland logical truths. He said:

“My reliance on sensibleshasalso becomeuntenable.Perhaps,thereforeI canrely onlyon thoserationaldata

19 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqldh.p. 83.20 Al-Ghazzaliyy.FreedomandFt4/Itlment, p. 64. Seealso,Al-Ghazzaliyy,

Al-Munqidh, p. 84.21 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Freedomand Fulfill m,ent,pp. 64-85.

64

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE. PUBLIC TEACHING

which belongto the categoryof primarytruths,suchasour assertingthat Ten is more that three’ and‘Oneandthe samething cannot be simultaneouslyaffirmed anddenied’and‘Oneandthesamething cannotbeincipientand eternal,existentand nonexistent,necessaryandimpossible’”.22

At this stage, asAl-Ghazzaliyy found himself trustingrational data,a challengewasposedby the sensibleswhichalso showedup as a personifiedcharacter.It addressedAl-Ghazzaliyyanddisputedhisacceptanceof rational data.Itsargumentwasbasedupon drawingsimilaritiesbetweenhisprevious acceptanceof sensiblesand his later approvalofrational data as the only trustworthy knowledge. Al-Ghazzaliyy’s doubt of sensibleswas the outcome of thepresenceof a higher faculty, namely, the judge of reason.WhythencouldIt notbethe casethattherewereyet anotherjudge higherthanthatof reasonwhich, if manifested,wouldrenderreasondoubtable?“Thesensibles”also argued,eventhough this other judge was not revealed, this did notindicatethe impossibility of its existence,23

Al-Ghazzaliyy next describedhimself as puzzled andnot knowing what to say. “The sensibles” reinforced itsposition by appealingto dreamswhere It said:

“Don’t you seethat when you are asleepyou believecertainthingsand imagine certaincircumstancesandbelieve they are fixed and lasting and entertain nodoubtsaboutthatbeingtheirstatus?Thenyou wakeupand know that all your imaginings and beliefs weregroundlessandunsubstantial,Sowhile everythingyoubelievethroughsensationor intellectioninyourwakingstatemay be true in relation to that state, what assur-ancehaveyou thatyou maynot suddenlyexperienceastate which would have the same relation to yourwaking stateas the latter has into your dreaminginrelation to that new and further state?If you foundyourself in such astate,you would besure that all yourrational beliefs were unsubstantial fancies.”24

Al-Ghazzaliyy considered that the latter state might

22 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Freedomand Fulfillment, p. 65.23 Ibid., p. 85.24 Ibid.. p.65.

65

AL-GHAZZALIYY

betheonethattheSufisclaim astheirs.Theyallegedto“see,in their states, conditions that are not compatible withrational data”.25In addition, he cited a part of a versefromthe Qur’an whose meaning could be translated as, “Wehave removedyour veil and today your sight is acute.”26For Al-Ghazzallyy, this verse indicated that one wouldsee things differently after deathand, thus, life could benothing but a long dream of which one could wake uponly afterdeath.

Al-Ghazzallyy tried to find a solution to this complexsituation, but he could not. He stated that any proofused would consistof primary knowledge that was alreadydoubted. Unable to find an answer, Al-Ghazzaliyy saidthat he found himself in a state of skepticism whichlastedclose to two months.27

During thesetwo months,Al-Ghazzaliyydescribedhissituation asthat of a skeptic who deniedthe possibility ofknowledge, as indicated in the tide of this chapter of Al-Munqidh: ‘The Avenues for Sophistry and the Denial of theSciences”(Madaichjjal-SafsatahwaJahrlat- ‘(Rum) ~28 He saidthat he contained this skepticism within himself, givingit neither utterancenor composition.29It Indeed appearstrue that he did not allow his skepticismto influence hislectures or writing. Thus. Al-Ghazzallyy maintained twolines of intellectual activity: the first was in pursuit of trueknowledge and the secondwas within conventional areasof study.

Al-Ghazzaliyy described his state of skepticism as a“sickness”, the remedy for which “was not the result ofarranging proofs or organizing words.” Rather, he claimedthat he was healedby “a light (ntaj, that Allah Most HighcastInto (his) chest”. At this stage,Al-Ghazzallyy regainedhis trust in logical necessities.He added that “this lightwas the key to most of the cognitions (ma’anjL3°

25 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqldh,p. 85.26 Ai-Qur’an, SuraQaf50:22.27 AJ-Ghazzali~,At-Munqidh,pp. 85-86.28 IbId., p. 83.29 Ibid., p. 86.30 Ibid., p. 86.

66

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE.. PUBLIc TEACHING

In a languagethat could only be describedas that ofSufism, Al-Ghazzaliyy defendedthe possibility of know-ledge through unveiling (kashj), which was the outcomeof divine illumination. By kashf,he meantattaining know-ledge directly (i.e. from Allah). Therefore,hewrote “whoeverrestricts the unveiling of truth to formulated proofs hasindeedstrainedthe broadmercyof Allah.3’

3.3 SKEPTICISM AND THE CLASSESOF SEEKERS

The sectionof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s skepticismin Al-Munqtdhisextremely important for any attempt to comprehendthedevelopmentin Al-Ghazzaliyy’s thought. This is especiallytrue becausehe placed this section before the chapteron the classesof seekers(AsnafAl-Taltbln) in which hedescribedthe next phaseof hisquestfor true knowledgeina fragmentedframe of time.32 As such, the sectionof skep-ticism forms the background to his assessmentof theclassesof seekers.

In his searchfor the methodolo~’that leadsfor trueknowledge.Al-Ghazzaliyylooked into thebeliefandcreedofeverysectandgroup, including Manichaeans33(zanddiqal4,where he sought the background of this position whichhe considered sobold.34 Eventually, after being relieved ofskepticism, he narrowed his search to four groups: thedialectical theologians,the esoterics.the philosophersandthe SuJfs.~Before analyzingeachof these groups in detail.he listed and described eachof them briefly:

31 Al-Ghazzallyy, Freedomand Ft4J111meat,p. 66.32 ftJ.Qhazzaliyyspentthreeyearsstudyingphilosophyand six months

in his “spiritual crises’ which took place right before he left theNlzamiyyahofBaghdadattheendof 488A.H./ 1095C.E. By deductingthreeandhalf years.to whichoneshould addthetime A1-C}hazzaliyyspentIn studying and writing aboutthedialecticaltheologians(Al-Mutakallimun) and the esoterics (Al-Batlnlyyah), I would say thatAl-Ghazzaliyy’sskepticismtook placeafterhis arrival attheNlzamiy-yak of BaghdadIn 484A.I-i. 1091 CE.

33 Another possiblemeaningfor zanadiqahIs “nihilists’, andanotheris“dualists”. for the Manlchaeansto whom the term zanndtqahwasfrequentlyusedwerethroughgolngdualists.

34 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Munqklh, pp. 79-81.35 Ibid., p. 89.

67

AL-GHAZZLIYY

1. The dialectical theologians (Al-MutakallirinTzrt), whoclaim, (yadda’Lzn) that they are men of independentjudgmentand reasoning.

2. The esoterics(Batinites),who allege (yaz’umün) to bethe unique possessorsof learningand the privilegedrecipients of knowledge acquired from the InfallibleImam.

3. The philosophers, who allege (yaz‘umürt) that theyare the men of logic andapodicticdemonstration.

4. The Sufis, who claim (yadda’ürt) to be the familiars ofthe divine Presenceand the men of mystic vision andillumination.36

Careful attention to the languagethat Al-Ghazzaliyyusedin this classificationrevealsthat he regardedthe fourindependentgroupsasactuallyforming two pairs. He usedonly two verbsin expressingwhat thegroupshadto say.Heappliedtheverb “yadda’ürz” (claim), which Is neutral, to Al-MutakaWmurtand the Sufis,but theverb “yaz ‘urnUn” (allege),which has a subtle negative tone, to the Batinites and thephilosophers. It is evident,thereforethat A1-Ghazzaliyyhadalready taken a position that was favourableto two of thefour groups. Furthermore, Al-Ghazzaliyy was convincedthat only one of these four groups must havethe metho-dology that leadsto true knowledgeand if not, he believedthat his casewas hopeless.He felt that hewascompelledtoproceedin his quest becausethere was no way to returnto conformism.Al-Ghazzaliyy maintainedthat oncesome-one becomesconsciousof his status as a conformist, itbecomesimperative for this personto be independentandto searchfor true knowledge on his own, It should benoted that Al-Ghazzaliyy exemptedfrom this obligation aconformist (muqallid) who is not aware of himself asbeingone.37

36 For this part of Al-Murtqidh. I haveusedthe translationof Mccarthywith slightchangespertainingto thewords‘claim’ and ‘allege’.Freedomand Fulfillment, p. 67.

37 AJ-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqidh. pp. 89-90,

68

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE,..PUBLICTEACHING

3.4 ON DIALECTICAL THEOLOGY (ILMAL-ICALAM)

After going through the periodof skepticism.Al-Ghazzaliyycontinued his quest for true knowledge. He first con-sideredthe dialecticaltheologians,the first of the classesofseekers(asuàfal-taiibin).38The rootsof Dialecticaltheology(kalam), or Islamic Scholasticismas it Is sometimescalled.emergedearly in Islamic history but gained considerablemomentumwith the introduction of Greek phfiosophy inthe eighth andninth centuries.39

Al-Ghazzaliyy was familiar with the methodologyandthe notions that Al-Mutakaltimun dealt with becauseofhis close ties with the Asha’irites. The latter were theheirs of KaiAm when the Mu’tazilltes surrenderedtheirleadership of Islamic theology to what might be calledthe Salafiyyah school which was headed by Ahmad IbnHanbal (d. 241 A.H./855 C,E.).4°Al-Ghazzaliyy studied‘Jim al-Kalarn, read the books of their scholarsand finallywrote about the subject.What he found wasthat the aimof al-Mutakailimün differed from his. They aimed at thepreservationof the creedof the Sunnites.Hewassearchingfor that group which aimed at truth without resorting toconformism, of which Al-MutakallimUnwerenot devoid.41

Al-Ghazzaliyy admitted that Al-Mutakallirnun weresuccessfulin attaining their goal which was defendingtheShari’ah, but also that they attemptedto study the truenatureof things. As a result, they researchedthe notionsof substancesand accidents,yet without reaching theultimate goal (al-ghayah al-quswa) in this field. Al-Ghazzallyy explained the latter position by stating that“since that (studyingAristotelian categories)was not the

38 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh, p. 89.39 Majid Fakhry. A History of Islamic Philosophy (New York: columbia

UniversityPress,1970)p. 56.40 The Mu’tazilites and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal were rivals for a long time.

The Issueat stakewas the questionwhether the Qur’an. being theword of Allah, was createdor eternal?The Mu’tazllites, who werepolitically influential during the reign of Al-Ma’mun (d. 223 AM.!833 AD.) and the subsequenttwo caliphs, advocated the notionthat the Qur’an was created, a position declared heretical by lbnHanbal,Fakhry, pp. 79-80.

41 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Al-Munqidh, p. 91.

69

AL’GHAZZALIYY

aim of their (At-Mutakailirnun) science,their searchdid notachieve the ultimate goal in it” 42 The interpretation of‘ultimate goal” here could be understood in Aristotelianterms. The general meaning of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s argumentis that the dialectical theologians did not reach completeunderstandingof theAristotelian categories.

Al-GhazzAliyy’s conflict with Al-Mutakallimun resultedfrom their appropriation of arguments from the thesesoftheir antagonists.Of this Al-Ghazzaliyy said:

“But in so doing (protecting religion) they relied onpremiseswhich they took overfrom their adversaries,being compelled to admit them either by uncriticalacceptance,or becauseof the Community’sconsensus(fjma), or by simple acceptancederiving from theQur’an and the Traditions. Most of their polemicwasdevoted to bringing out the inconsistenciesof theiradversariesand criticizing them for the logicallyabsurd consequencesof what they conceded. This,however, is of little use in the case of one (i.e. Al-Ghazzaliyy) who admits nothing at all except theprimary andself-evidenttruths.”43

It is clearthat atthis stageAl-Ghazzaliyyrestrictedhisacceptanceto primaryandself-evidenttruthsanddeniedthesamestatusto the sourcesof IslamicShari’ah: the Qur’an,Traditions and the consensusof the companionsof theProphet IS.A.A.S.]44This fact showsthat Al-Ghazzãliyywasconsistentin his position. He wantedto find an objectivetruth that would “provide an effective meansof dispellingentirely the darknessdue to the bewildermentabout thedifferencesdividing men”.~

3.5 AL-GUAZZALIYY’S ENCOUNTERWITH PHILOSOPHY

Accordingto Al-Muriqidh mm al-DaIaL. Al-Ghazzaliyy stated

42 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al’Munqalh. p. 93.43 Al-Ghazzallyy, Freedomand Fulfillment, pp. 68-69.44 The consensusof the companions of the prophet became,in later

generations,the consensusof thescholars (ama’ at- (llama’) at anygiventime.

45 Al-Ghazzallyy, Freedomand Fulfillment. p. 69.

70

AL’GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE...PUBLICTEACHING

that in his quest for true knowledgehe started studyingphilosophyafter hewasdonewith ‘flmn al-Kalãm(which didnot provide the remedyfor which he was looking). In hisintroduction to the section on philosophy he outlined hisapproach to this new field. He wanted to pursue thescienceof philosophy to a level higher than that of themostknowledgeablein thefield. Only then,heargued,couldone know the intricate depthsof the science.46

Al-Ghazzãliyy was aware that he could not rely onsecondary sources, such as those of al-Mutakallimun, inorder to study philosophy. For him, their books includedfragmented philosophical words that were complex andcontradictory to one another. Instead, he decided to readbooks of philosophy directly without the assistanceofa teacher. Although he was teaching three hundredstudents at the Nizamiyyah of Baghdad and writing inthe Islamic revealed sciencesat the same time, in hisspare time Al-Ghazzaliyy was able to master philosophyin less than two years. He continuedreflecting on it foralmost another year.47 He reached the level where hebecame so familiar with the measureof its precisionsas well as its deceits, deceptionsand delusions,that hehad no doubt about his thoroughgraspof it.48

As a result of his studyhe wrote two books: MaqasmdA1-Fa1ãs~fah(The Alms of the Philosophers)and TahafutaI-Fa1ds~fah(The Incoherenceof the Philosophers).It wasAl-Ghazzaflyy’s intention to write a book which wouldencompass the thought of the philosophers withoutcriticizing or adding anything to it. This book was to befollowed by another (i.e. Tahdfut a1-FaIds~fah)that wouldinclude his critique of the contents of the first one. Itwas this latter work that prompted Ibn Rushd49to write(around 576 A.H./ 1180 C.E.), Tahafut al-Tahafut (TheIncoherenceof the Incoherence) which constituted a

46 Al-Ghazzaliyy, al-Munq(dh, p. 94.47 IbId., pp. 94-95.48 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Freedomand Fulfilment p. 70.49 The full nameof Ibn Rushd, who is known in Latin asAverroes,was

Abu al-walid Muhammad Ibn Ahanid lbn Muhammad lbn Rushd.He was born in 520A.M.!! 126 cE. and died 595 A.H./1 198 CE.

71

AL’GHAZZALIYY

systematic rebuttal of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s critique of this me-langeof Greco-IslamicPhilosophy.50

MaqasmdA1-Fa1as~fah(whichaccordingto Brockelmannwas written in 488 A.H./ 1095 C.E.)5’ was a pioneerworkin its attempt to deliberately present an objectiveaccountof the thoughtof adversarieswithout the inclusionof the author’s ideas. Al-Ghazzaliyy wanted to introducephilosophy as the philosophersknew it. Of this objective.he said:

“I thoughtthat I shouldintroduce,prior to the Tah4flit,a conciseaccountthat will include the story of theiraims(maqàsid)which will be derivedfrom their logical,natural andmetaphysicalsciences,without distinguish-ing betweenwhat is right and what is wrong, withoutadditionsand along with that they believed as theirproofs.“52

The works of A1-Ghazzaliyy beganto be translatedinto Latin before the middle of the twelfth century C.E.53Of these, MaqUsidA1-Folo.sifahwas soinfluential in LatinEuropethat Fr. Manuel Alonso listed forty four theologiansandphilosophers,including St. ThomasAquinas who him-selfreferredto this book thirty onetimes.M

In Maqasid al-Faldstfa, AI-Ghazzaliyy divided thesciencesof the philosophersinto four major categories:mathematical (al-rmyadmyyat), logical (aI-mamttmqmyyat),natural (al-tdbmIyyat) and metaphysical (al-ilahiyyal) .~ Helisted politics, economy56andethics assubdivisionsundermetaphysics.In A1-MunqidhmAn al-Dalal, he listed politicsandethicsasmajor sectionsalongwith thefirst four.57

50 Fakhry. p. 307.51 Badawi, p. 53.52 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Mo.qasidoJ’Fatasffali. p. 3153 M. SaeedSheikh, Islamic Philosophy (London: The Octagon Press,

1982)p. 107.54 ManuelAlonso: “Infiuencia deAlgazelenel mundolatlno’, Al-Andalus.

vol. XXIII, Fasc.2, pp.37l—380.Madrid, 1958.SeeBadawi,pp. 56—58.55 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Maqasidal’Faagfah. p.3l.56 For “economy’.Al-Ghazzaliyyusedtadbital’manzil, managementofthe

house,thellteralArabictranslationof oikonomlainGreek.Thecontem-poraryArabic translationof economyasa scienceIs Iqtisad.

57 AI-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqidh, p. 100.

72

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE. PUBLIC TEACHING

Regarding mathematics, Al-Ghazzaliyy thought thatit dealt with geometryand arithmetic. Neither of thesesubjects contradicted reason. As a result, Al-Ghazzaliyydid not think that he ought to include a detailedaccountof mathematicsin his book.58This way of treating mathe-matics shows that reason was the criterion that Al-Ghazzãliyyapplied when he entertainedphilosophy.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s basic position regardingmetaphysicswas that most of what the philosophersbelieved in thisfield was contrary to the truth (al-haq). The correct ideaswere seldom included. On the other hand, in logic hethought that mistakes were very rare. The philosophersonly differed with their Muslim counterparts,whom Al-GhazzaliyycalledAid al-Haq (peopleof truth), in the termi-nology. not in the meanings.As for naturalscience,heheldthat it compriseda melangeof true andfalsenotions.59

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s judgement regarding metaphysicsneedssome clarification. In Tahafut al-Falastfah, he heldthat there were mistakes in translating the works ofAristotle which led to distortions andchangesin theArabictexts. Thesemistakes prompted the Islamic philosophersto Interpretthe philosophicaltexts in afashion that causedconflict amongstthemselves.In addition, he restrictedhisdiscussionof philosophy to the booksof A1-Fãrabl and IbnSinã.SinceAI-Farabi’s metaphysicswasbasicallyamelangeof Neo-PlatonismandAristotellanlsm,onecanseethe rootsof A1-Ghazzaliyy’s position that what the philosophersbelievedin this field is contrary to the truth.6°

A1-Ghazzãliyy defined logic as “the law (qanUn) thatdistinguishesa sound premise and analogy from a falseone, which leadsto the discernmentof true knowledge”,61

In addition, he reviewedall the subjectsof logic Includinginduction (istiqrã’). He held that induction could becorrect only if all parts were covered: if one part couldpossibly be different, then induction In this case couldnot yield true knowledge.To prove his point, he used thefollowing argument:

58 A1-Ghazza1I~,Macjasidal-Falo.slfah,pp. 31-32.59 Ibid., p. 32.60 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Tahafut pp. 76-77.61 AJ-Ghazzaliyy,MacjasidaI-Falaslfah, p. 36.

73

AL-GI-IAZZALIYY

Everyanimal is ahuman being, mare, etc.

Everyhumanbeingmoveshis lowerjawwhenhechews.

Every maremoves its lower jaw when it chews.

And every (animal) other than these two moves itslowerjaw when it chews.

The conclusion: everyanimal movesits lowerjaw.

A1-Ghazzãliyy said that if one animal differs, as isthe case with the crocodile which moves its upper jaw.then the conclusion doesnot yield true knowledge. So, byparts he means membersof the same speciesor groupas in the case of “mare”, “human being” and “crocodile”.Al-Ghazzaliyy maintainedthat induction was suitable formatters of jurisprudence (fiqhiyycit), but not for trueknowledge.62This suggeststhat Al-Ghazzaliyy acceptedinduction for practical reasons,but not as a source oftrueknowledge.

In addition to his review of logic in MaqasidaI-Falâ-stfah, Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote several books on logic duringthis period. He wrote Mt’yar al-’IImft Fann at-Mantiq (TheCriterion of Knowledge in the Art of Logic), Mihak at-Nazar ft at-Mantiq (The Touch-Stone of Reasoning inLogic) andMizanAl-’Amat(The Balanceof Action).63 -

It was argued that the first book, Mt’yar al- ‘Jim fiFarm al-Mantiq, was the last part of Tahafut aI-Fa1Us~fah.Unlike Ibn S[n~ who beganhis A1-Ishardt wa al-Tanbihatwith a discussionof logic,64 A1-Ghazzaliyy stated that hewasgoing to write the kit&b65 of Mi’yar al-’Ilm at the endofTahafut al-Falástfah. One can see that whether theycomprise one or two books dependson how to interpretthe word kitab. If it is interpreted as chapter, then thereis onebook: if it is interpreted asbook then thereare two.

62 M-Ghaizali~,Maqasidal-Falas~fah.pp. 89-90.63 Badawi. p. xvi.64 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Mi’yaral- Jim. AhmadShamsAl-Din, ed. (Beirut: Daral-

Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 1990) p. 11.65 Theword kitab is usedin classicalArabic literatureto indicate,among

many other meanings,either a book or achapter.

74

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE...PUBLICTEACHING

Regardlessof the latter issue,Al-Ghazzaliyy placedMiyãrat- ‘un-i “after” the Tahafut in order that those who werealready familiar with logic could commence with hiscriticism of philosophy directly. For those who did notunderstandthe vocabulary that he used in respondingto the philosophers, Al-Ghazzaliyy instructed them tostart with Mt’yar at- ‘Jim.66

Despite the fact that Al-Ghazzaliyy wanted his pre-sentation of metaphysics and logic in the TahaJüt andML’yar at- ‘Urn to be different from their order in Ibn Sina’sat-Ishãrat wa al-Tanihat, Marmura arguesthat “much ofthe accountof demonstrationin the Mi’yUr seemsto be afaithful summaryof Avicenna’s Demonstration(A1-Isha.r&t)which in turn is an exposition and an enlargementofAristotle’s PosteriorAnatytics”.67

There was yet anotherpurposefor Mi’y&r at- ‘urn. Al-Ghazzaliyy intended that the relationship between logicand thought to be analogousto that betweenmeter (‘an]d)and poetry. For him, the theoreticalsciences(at- ‘Uturn at-nazariyyah), which correspondto “thought” in the aboveanalogy,werenotinnatebut ratheracquired(mustahsatah).Al-Ghazzaliyy realizedthat the processof acquiring know-ledge resulted in many mistakes in reasoning whichrequired a criterion for science (rni’yar Ii aI-nazar~whichcorrespondsto logic.68

One of the most important claims in Mi’yUr at- ‘Jimwas Al-Ghazzaliyy’s assertionthat, in every person,therewere three judges: a sensible-judge (hakirn hisstyy), animaginative-judge(hUkim wahmiyy)6°and a rational-judge(hakim ‘aqliyy). He declaredthe rational-judge to be theonly correct one.7°This suggeststhat Mi’yãr at- ‘ttm musthave been written after the end of his two months of

66 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Taha/izt al-Falas(fah, Sulaitnan Dii:~va.ed. (Cairo:Dar al-Ma’arif, 1972)p. 85.

67 Michael Marmura, “Ghazali and DemonstrativeScience, Journal oftheHistory ofPhilosophy. III (1965): 189.

68 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mi’yar, p. 26.69 Al-Ghazzaliyydefined thejudgeof illusion in termsof its falsejudge-

ment suchasdenyingtheexistenceof a beingthatone“cannot pointto its direction’, whichindicatesa beingthat is spaceless.

70 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mi’yar. p. 29.

75

AL-GHAZZALIYY

skepticism for only then had he regained his trust inlogical necessities.7’

The language that A1-Ghazzaliyy used in his intro-duction to discuss the above position in Mi’yãr at- ‘Jimwas somewhatsimilar to the one he used later on in At-Munqidh rnin al-Datat. In At-Munqtdh, Al-Ghazzaliyy por-trayedthedifferent faculties, including the senses,discern-ment and reasonaccording to their natural evolution inthe human being. But he did not mention the imagi-native-judge and restricted himself to the sensible-judge and the rational-judge!2 The idea of at-hakirn at~wahrniyy was not an original idea of Ai-Ghazzaliyy. Heborrowed the concept,along with that of the imaginative(khayatiyyah) and thinking (rnufakkirah) powers, fromthe philosophers.73He differed from thephilosophers,how-ever by attempting to justilS’ his usageof theseconceptsthrough textsof the Shari’ah (the Qur’an andthe Sunnah)or evenwith Athär.74

Thesecondbookon logic, Mihak al-Nazarfi at-Mantiq,was written as a shorter, refined version of Mi’yar cii- ‘JimfT Fanrt at-Mantiq which was not circulated when It waswritten becauseit neededsome clarification.75

At the end of Mi’yar at- ‘utm, Al-Ghazzaliyy stated hisintention to write a book which would provide a criterionfor action (Mizan A1-’AmaD76 just as Mi’yO.r at- ‘Jim was acriterion for knowledge.77A1-Ghazzãliyy reiterated thesame concept in his introduction to Mi.zan cii- ‘Arnalwhere he discussedhappiness.For him, there were twoconditions for the attainment of happiness: knowledgeandaction. He said that he intended to discuss the action

71 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Ai-Munqidii. p. 86.72 Th&IL, pp. 83—85.73 Al-Ghazzallyy.Tahafut, pp. 252—253.74 Athar indicates narrations about the early generationsof Muslims.

Theseatharwereneverconsideredaspart of theSharl’ah.Anexampleof Al-Ghazzaliyy’suseof athar was an accountaboutAbu Bakr. thefirst Caliph, on page32 of Mi’yar al’ ‘lint

75 Al-Ghazzaliyy.Mlhakal-JVazarjIal-Mantlq, MuhammadBadral-Din a)-Nasaniyy, ed. (Beirut:DarAn-Nahdaha1-Hadithah,1966) p. 145.

76 The literal translationof Mlzo.n a&’Amatis TheBalancefor Action.77 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Mi’yar. p. 334.

76

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE..,PUBLICTEACHING

which leadsto happinessin a way that transcendedcon-formism (taqtud) in accordancewith the conditions he setforth in Mi ‘yãr at- ‘Itrn, andplannedto begin it with a briefsummaiyofthefundamentalsofhis criterionof knowledge.78

Al-Ghazzaliyy stated that happinessconsistedin thelife hereafter:i.e., the eternal.79Thus he revealedhis sym-pathy with the position of the Sufi leaders regardingeternal happiness,who held that happinessshould notbe thought of merely as the attainmentof paradiseor theavoidance of hellfire. They considered such aspirationscrass,sincetherewasamorehonorableaim.8°Al-Ghazzaliyyexplained this aim as unveiling (kashJj divine mattersthrough divine inspiration (ithãrn). He stated, citing thecase of the Qur’an, that knowledge is never conveyeddirectly from Allah to human beings; this act takesplaceindirectly (eg. by angels),81 Theposition of the Sufi leaders,however, contradictsthe Qur’an which considersseekingparadiseor the avoidanceof hellfire to be legItimate.82Byagreeing with the Sufi leaders, Al-Ghazzaliyy’s positioncouldbe interpretedas contradictoryto that of the Qur’an.It shouldbe noted that Al-Ghazzaliyy, under the influenceof Sufism,differedwith theQur’anandtheSunnahIf thesetextsare to be takenliterally.

In addition to hisemphasison the correlationbetweenhappiness and the noetic elements in kashf, as heexplained above, Al-Ghazza]iyy said that the happinessof anything lies in its perfection. He understoodthis per-fection, in thecaseofthe humanbeings,to be perceivingthereality of the intelligibles (ma’qulatj, as they are in them-selves (‘ala rna hya ‘atayh), without the interference ofimagination and the sensibles.83It appearsthat he washinting at divine inspiration as a sourceof knowledgethatis not hinderedby imaginationor senslbles.

Al-Ghazzaliyy maintainedthat in order to receivethisdivine inspiration, one should purl~’his soul from what-

78 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Mizan al-Ama!, Sulalman Dunya. ed. (Cairo: Dar a)-Ma’arifBi-Misr. 1964)p. 179.

79 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Mizan. p. 180.80 Ibid., p. 185.81 Ibid.. p. 205.82 Al-Qur’an, Sura al-Anbiya’ 21:90,and Suraat-Sojdah32:16.83 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mizan, pp. 195-196.

77

AL-GHAZZALIYY

cver lust he has. After conqueringbodily lust and freeinghimself from slavery, one should start spiritual exercise(riyadah).84To suppprt his argument on the purificationof the soul, AJ-Ghazzaliyyquoteda verse from the Qur’anwhich promisessuccessfor the one who purifies her/hissoul.85

If someonedoesnot receive such divine inspiration,AI-Ghazzaliyy assertedthat thIs personis to be blamed.To explain this, he provided the following metaphoricalexample:

‘Thereisnothingin thecoloredpicturetopreventit frombeing reflectedin iron; theveil is in therust and in thelack of a polisherto cleanIt.”°6

Similarly, A1-Ghazzallyy went on to say, not onlyshould onepolish the the mirror by cleaningthe dirt If hewould like it to reflect pictures. buthe shouldalsoface it inthe direction of what he would like this mirror to reflect.87By “mirror” Al-Ghazzãliyy meant the soul, by “dirt”,wordly desiresandby “picture”, divine knowledge.

A1-Ghazzaliyy believed in the possibility of changinghumanbehavior.Hethoughtthat if it waspossibleto changethe natureof animals (i.e. taming them), then one mustnot deny human beings the samepossibility.88 He statedthat human beings havethe potential to reach the levelwhere they can acquire truth. If they strive hard enoughagainst their desires, they can reach the level of theangels. And if they allow dirt to accumulate on themirror of the soul, by following their desires,theyjoin theranks of the animals 89

To changeone’s character, one should attain virtuewhich could be achievedin two ways. The first is throughwhat Al-Ghazzaliyy called human education (ta’atturnbashariyy) which involves the will and needs time and

84 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mtzun. pp. 196-197.85 Al-Qur’an, Suraal-Shams91:9.86 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mizan, p. 208.87 Ibid., p. 218.88 Ibid., p. 247.89 Ibid,,p,218.

78

AL-GFIAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE...PUBLIC TEACHING

practice according to the ability of the person involved.The secondway takes place through ‘divine grace bawditähiyy) where the human being becomesknowledgeableat birth as ‘Isa Ibn Maryam (Jesusson of Mary [a.s.]1 andYahya Ibn Zakariyya [a.s.] in addition to the otherprophets.Also, it was said that this (knowledge) might begivento non-prophets”.°~

Al-Ghazzàliyy’s discussionof virtue is clearly Aristo-telian in its Inspiration, with many conceptsthat can betracedbackto NicornacheanEthics. He statedthat the soulhastwo powers:therational (at- ‘aqtiyyah) andthepracticalintellect (at- ‘aqi cii- ‘arnaliyy). Thefirst one is responsibleforreceiving “theoretical practical wisdom” (at-hikrnah at-‘arnaflyyah al-nazariyyah)°’ which he defined as truthsthat are absoluteand do not changebecauseof time orplace. The secondis the practical intellect which attainsmoral wisdom (al-hikmah al-khutuqiyyah). This moralwisdom is related to the lower part of the soul which Al-Ghazzãliyy definedas that whIch addressesthe concernsof thebody.92

Al-Ghazzãliyy believed that all virtues could beclassifiedunder four major categories- wisdom, courage,chastityandjustice. Hemaintainedthat avirtue is amedian(wasat) that falls betweentwo vices: excessanddeficiency.Similar to the position of Aristotle, Al-Ghazzãliyyexemptedjustice from the aboverule, stating that justice has onlyoneextremewhich is injustice.93

MiZÔn at- ‘Arndt can be placed in the developmentofAl-Ghazzaliyy’s epistemologyby means of his statementabout the compositionof this book - namely, that most ofwhat is in Mizãn at- ‘Ama! is basedupon the Sufi way. Inresponseto a previous questionabout whether Al-Ghaz-zãliyy’s account of Sufism in this book reflects his own

90 A1-Ghazza)iyy,Mizan, p. 257.91 Aristotle distinguishedbetween“theoretical” and ‘practical wisdom’.

Nevertheless,we can see that Al-Ghazza)iyy was inspired byAristotle’s discussion of these two concepts; he departed fromAristotle by bringing these two categories together. See Aristotle,NicomacheanEthics, Martin Ostwald, trans.and ed. (Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merill Educational Publishing, 1983)pp. 147—173.

92 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Mizan, p. 265.93 Ibid., p. 264—273.

79

AL-GHAZZALIYY

belief, he said that he was only reporting it?4 Neverthe-less, one can see his inclination towards Sufism inmanyplaces.

Al-Ghazzaliyy endedMLa&n a!- ‘Amal in the samewayhe started it. There was a lengthy yet very important in-vitation to abandonconformism (taqUd):

“Do not look at the (available)schools (as sourcesofknowledge), and seek truth through research,soyou will haveyour own school. Do not be like a blindpersonimitating a leaderwho guides you to a way,while you are surroundedby a thousandleaderssimilar to yours, who are telling you that he rushedyou into dangerand that he misled you away fromthe right path.You will eventuallyknow the injusticeof your leader.There is no salvation except inindependence.”95

A1-Ghazzaliyyaddedthat it would be good enough ifthe above words lead the reader to doubt his Inheritedbelief, so he maybegin searchingfor truth because“doubtsleadto the truth, and hewho doesnot doubt,doesnot look,andhewho doesnot look doesnot see,andhewho doesnotseelingers blind andastray”~

3.6 AL-GHAZZAL1YY’S CRITIQUE OF PHILOSOPHY

After Al-Ghazzaliyy reported the core of philosophy as heunderstoodIt in Maqasid al-Falas(/tth. he followed with,Tahizfi.tt at-FalfzsVah The latter was written basically asa critique of the metaphysicsof the ancient (I.e. Greek)philosophers.97Although Al-Ghazzallyy mentioned Aristo-tle’s name In particular,~he restricted his criticism towhateverAl-Farabi (d. 339 A.H. /950 C.E.)°9and Ibn Sina

94 A1-Ghazzallyy.Mlzan, p. 358.95 Ibid., p. 409.96 Ibid.97 A1-Ghazzallyy.Tahafut,p. 75.98 Ibid., p. 76.99 The full nameof Al-Farabi, who was known in Latin asAlpharablus,

was Muhammad lbn Muhammad lbn Tarkhan Lbn Urlagh AbuNasrAl-Farabi. He was born at Wasi], a village nearFarab. In 257A.H./87oCE.

80

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE..PUBLICTEACHING

(d. 428 A.H./1037 C.E410°incorporated in their philo-sophies.101Of the issuesthey dealt with, he Commentedon twenty: sixteenin metaphysicsand four in the naturalsciences.102He listed theseissuesasfollow:

1. The refutation of their theory of the eternity of theworld.

2. The refutationof their theory of the incorruptibility oftheworld and of time and of motion.

3. The demonstrationof their confusion in saying thatAllah is the agentand the maker of the world in Hisproduct and act, and the demonstrationthat theseexpressionsarein their systemonly metaphorswithoutanyreal sense.

4. Showingthat theyareunableto provethe existenceofa creatorof theworld.

5. To showtheir incapacity to proveAllah’s onenessandtheimpossibility of two necessaryexistentsbothwith-outa cause.

6. To refute their denialof attributes.

7. To refute their claim that nothing cansharewith theFirst its genus,and be differentiatedfrom it througha specific difference, and that with respect to itsintellect the division into genusand specific differencecannotL~appliedto it.

8. To refute their theory that the existenceof the First issimple, namely that it is pure existenceand that itsexistencestandsin relation to no quiddity and to no

100 The full name of Ibn Sina was Abu All Al-Husayn Ibn ‘Abdullahlbn Sina. His Latin name was Avicenna. He was born in 370A.H./980 cE.

101 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Tahafut, pp. 77-78.102 Ibid., pp. 86—87.

81

AL-CHAZZALIYY

essence,but standsto necessaryexistenceasdo otherbeingsto their quiddity.

9. To show their incapacity to prove that the First isincorporeal.103

10. To prove their incapacity to demonstratethat theworld has a creator and a cause, and that in factthey are forcedto admit atheism.

11. To show the incapacity of the philosophersto provewhat theybelieve:thattheFirst (i.e.Allah) knows otherthings besidesHis own self, and that He knows thegeneraand the speciesin a universalway.

12. On the impotenceof the philosophersto prove thatAllah knows Himself.

13. To refute those who affirm that Allah Is Ignorant ofthe Individual things which are divided in lime intopresent,pastandfuture.

14. To refute their proof that heavenis an animal movingin a circle in obedienceto Allah.

15. To refute the theory of the philosophers about theaim which movesheaven.

16. To refutethe philosophicaltheorythat the soulsof theheavensobserveall the particulareventsof this world.

17. The denial of a logical necessitybetweencauseandeffect.

18. Theimportanceofthephilosophersto showby demon-

103 SImon Van Den Bergh wrongly translatedFt taj(zthim ~an bagananna al-Awwal taysabyisrn as “To refute their proof that the firstis incorporeal.” Averroes, Tahafut al-Tahafut, Simon van DenBergh, trans. and ed (London: MessrsLuzac and Company, 1954)p. vii.

82

AL-GHAZZLIfl’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE., PUBLIC TEACHING

strativeproof that the sou(is a spiritual substance.

19. Refutationofthephilosophers’prooffor the immortalityof the soul.

20. Concerning the philosophers’ denial of bodily re-surrection.’°4

Al-Ghazzaliyy declared thesephilosophers blasphe-mous on three counts: “their saying that all substances

(Jawahir) are eternal, that Allah does not know particularaccidents involving people and their denial of the resur-rection of bodies.” He held that thesethree issues” do notfit Islam in any fashion”.105

In this vein, modem andcontemporaryscholarshavequestionedthe natureof Islamic philosophy: exactly whatis Islamic about it?’°°The only answer,I think, that couldreconcile the various positions regarding this issue is thenotion that this philosophy is IslamIc as a product of theIslamic civilization. Thus, “Islamic” in the cultural sensecould be applied to every contribution to knowledge thattook place anywherein the land of Islam during that era,including that of a Jew like Müsa Ibn Maymün (Maimo-nides) or a Christian like Yahiyä lbn ‘Adi.’°’ It would beinappropriate to call it Arabic philosophy, since thiswould imply that those who contributedto It were Arabs;

104 Averroes.Tahafutat-TahafuLpp. vil-viii. I haveusedBergh’stransla-tion ofthesetwentyissueswith somemodifications.

105 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Tahafut,pp. 307-309.106 An exampleofthis is Learnan’sstatement:“It is ashamethat Islamic

philosophy as atopic of interestIs at presentlargely confined toorientalists(e.g. Goldzlher,Muller, Munk, Noldeke, Renari andIDeBoer) ratherthan philosophers.The former often haveconcernsand interpretivemethodswhich are not sharedby the latter, andvice versa.’ SeeOliver Leainan,An Introduction to MedievalIslamicPhilosophy (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press,1985)p. xi.

107 YahiaIbn ‘Mi, alsoknownastheLogician(At-Mantlqiyy).wasatenthcentury Jacobitetheologianand philosopher.He translatedAris-totle’s Poettea,Sophtstiea,Toptca,andpossibly Metaphystca.1-fe wascreditedwith atranslationof Plato’sLaws,acommentaryon Topteaand parts of Physica VIII and Metaphystcxzand thewhole of LieGeneratione.In addition,hewrote aseriesof original philosophicaltreatises.F’alchiy, fltstonj, p. 25.

83

AL-GHAZZALIYY

it would be Arabic only in the sensethat it was writtenin the Arabic language.As a matter of fact, those whoused Arabic did so becauseIt was lingua franca. lbnKhaldün Cd. 808 A.H./ 1406CE.)statedin his Muqaddimahthat in the majority of the sciences,most scholarswerenon-Arabs (‘Ajam) exceptin very rare cases,and in somefields, they were all non-Arabs.’°5

A1-Ghazzãliyy sought to developa philosophy that isIslamic in its very essence.He knew that in order to dothat, he hadto establishand verify the epistemologyuponwhich this bodyof thoughtdepends.

In additionto his criticism of thetwentyquestionsthathe listed in the Introduction of Tahàjitt at-FaIasIfo.h,Al-Ghazzaliyy argued against the methodology and generalacceptanceof metaphysicsby the philosophers in theIslamic world. This is of particular interest becauseofthe original goal that he establishedfor himself; he wasstill looking for a methodthatwould leadto trueknowledge.

His first argument was that the philosophers (i.e.Al-Farabi and Ibn Sinà) acquired their thought throughhabitually communicatedconformism (taqlicl samh’i i~Th.According to A1-Ghazzãliyy, they simply moved from onemode of conformism to anotherwithout verification. Hissecondargumentwas psychological: they acceptedGreekphilosophy becauseof the fame of nameslike Socrates,Hippocrates, Plato and Aristotle.’09 The third was basedupon Aristotle’s criticism of all his predecessorsincludingPlato, his own teacher,which Al-Ghazzaliyy thought wasan indication of an incoherent metaphysical system. Inhis lastargument,Al-Ghazzaliyyaccusedthe philosophersof using the accuracyof logic andmathematicsto createafalse impression of a sound generalization which wouldencompassmetaphysicsbecausehe held that metaphysicslackedpreciseproofs.11°

Regardingthe fairness of A1-Ghazzaiiyy’s position, Ithink that he was consistentin the first point which wasdirected at the Islamic Philosophers;he rejected confor-

105 Ibn Khaldun, al-Muqo.ddlmah (Beirut: Dar al-Qalam, 1984) pp.543—545.

109 A1-Gha2zaliyy.Tahaful~pp. 73—74.110 Ibid., pp. 76—77,

84

AL-GHAZZLIYY’S QUESTFOR I{NOWLEDGE..,PUBLIC TEACHING

mism or uncritical acceptanceof any set of thought in-cluding that of Shari’ah. The originality of these philo-sophersis still a disputedissue. On the secondpoint, Iwould reiterate the position of Dunya who defended,inhis commentaryon the Tahãjitt.” the philosophers’orderof subjectsand thus there is no problem with beginningeither with mathematicsor logic. Yet, Dunya did not ruleout the possibility that A1-Ghazzaliyyhad a debatewithsome philosopherwho gavehim the impressionthat thephilosopherswereentrenchingthemselvesbehind a shieldof logic andmathematics)’2Thethirdpoint is aclearcaseofa falsead hominernargument.

Oneissuein particular, theseventeenthin theTahãfiit,which is concernedwith causality,is especiallynoteworthy.LongtimebeforeDavid Hume,Al-Ghazzaliyysaidthat, in hisopinion, “the conjunction (al-iqtiràn) betweenwhat is con-ceived, by way of habit (/1 al- ‘ãdah), as causeand effect isnot necessary(laysa darfiriyyan)”.”3 He provided a list ofpairs that were usually thought of as causeand effect bythe philosophers(e.g., fire andburning, light and sunrise,diarrheaand laxatives).For him, the conjunctionbetweenthemwasaresultof thesequencein which theywerecreatedby Allah, not becausethis conjunction was necessaryinitself. Moreover,he thought that it was possiblefor eitherone of thesepairs (eg. fire or burning) to exist without theother.’14Hedid not seeanylogical contradictionsincethesepairs are the phenomenaof nature and nature as such,according to the philosophers’ own admission, does notbelong to the realm of necessitybut to that of possibility,which may or may not exist.~

A1-Ghazzaliyy criticized the philosophers’ proof ofcausalitybecauseitwas limited to observation(mushahadah)which dependson the senses (eg. sight). a sourceof know-ledge (hat he could not ‘cept on its own merit. Thus Al-

1 1 Diinya. ConirTlenlarv, Johnflit, by AI-Ghazzaliy’v, pp. 76—77.112 A1-Ghazzaliyy.ToIia(,d. p. 77.113 Ibid., 239.114 Ibid.115 Iii Tuhafut al-Tahatttt Ibn Rushd Averroesl consideredA1-Ghazza-

livv’s conceptof causality a denial of theefficient cause,which ledhim to accuseA1-Chazzaliyyof Sophistry.Sheikh. p. 98.

85

AL-GHAZzUYY

Ghazzãliyy’s position regarding causality is consistentwith his theoryof knowledge.Using the exampleof fire andburning, he said that “observation could only prove thatburning took placewhen therewasfire, andnotby fire”. Heheld that inertandlifelessobjectssuchasfire areincapableof action andthuscannotbethe agent.”6To provehis pointthat fire is not the agent (al-fa’ilah) that causesburning.Al-Gha.zzaliyy used a proof, which is Neoplatonic in itstone, from the argumentsof the philosophers.They heldthat accidents(a’rad) and incidents(hawadith) emanate,atthe time of contactbetween“bodies”, from the provider offorms (wahib al-suwar) whom they thought to be anangel.”7 Accordingly, one cannot claim that fire is theagent of burning. In addition, Al-Ghazzaliyy argued thatthe agent“creates” burningat the time of contactbetweena cotton ball and fire with hiswill (bi’iradatihfl.”5 Al-Ghaz-zãliyy reduced the problem of causality to that of “will”which makes it rationally possible for the agent, whomhe held to be Allah, not to createburning even thoughthereis contact.”°

A1-Ghazzallyy presentedthis theory of causality inorder to allow room for the existenceof miracles (mujizat)that were associatedwith prophets,without resorting toallegorical interpretations as the philosophers did.’2°Oneof the miraclesthat he choseasan example,wasthatof prophet lbrahim Fa.s.l12’ The story was that the people

116’ Al-Ghazzaliyy, Tahafu~p. 240.117 Ib&L,242.115 This particular concept influencedNicolaus of Autrecourtwho

arguedthat ‘this consequence,namely. ‘fire Is close to flax andthereIs no impediment,hencethe flax will be consumed’,Is notevidentby anevidencededucedfromthefirst piinclple.”See.HarryA.Wolfson,“NicolausofAutrecourtandGhazzaliyy’sArgumentAgainstcausality,Specutum(1969). pp. 234—238.

119 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Tahafut~pp. 242-243.120 Ibid., p. 236,121 This miraclewaswrongly disputedby lIal Mon astheonly miracleto

be mentionedby A1-Ohazzallw in Tahafut aI-Falas(/tzhwhen hediscussedcausality.llai Mon. A1-Ohazzallyyon causality.JournaloftheAmerlcanOriental Society100.4(1980)p.402.A1-Ghazzaliyymentionedthreeothermiraclesof Moses,Jesusand Muhammadinchronologicalorder,althoughheonly mentionedthenameof Mosesin addition to that of Ibrahim which disqualifiesMon’s claim. Al-Ghazzaliyy,Tahafutal-Pakisifak p. 236.

86

AL-GHAZZALIYY5 QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE...PUBLICTEACHING

of lbrãhim attempted to punish him for breaking theiridols by throwing him into fire but no burning took place.In the Qur’an it was Allah’s will that the fire would notharmTbrahim.’22Al-GhazzaliyymaintainedthatAllah [S.W.T.]was the ageht (fa’il) of every action, either directly or indi-rectly (I.e. by theangels)•‘23 Thisdeprivationof lifelessobjects(eg. fire) from being the agent can be interpreted as Al-Ghazzaliyy’s defence of Allah’s omnipotence and freewill. Indeed, Ibn Sinã held that Allah is the supremeessentialefficient causewhich indicatesthat the world Isa necessaryproduct of His essence(i.e. He cannot butcreatethe world).’24

The conclusion that Al-Ghazzàliyy reached afterstudyingphilosophywasthat this sciencedid not fulfill theaim of his search.In addition, he statedthat “reason (‘aqi)is not capableof attaining all the goals nor canIt solve allproblems” 125 A1-Ghazzaliyy used reason in showing thelimitations of reasonin his criticism of philosophy, andassuchhe waspaving the way for a sourceof kowledgeotherthan that of reason. Al-Ghazzaliyy’s position towardsreasonhadresemblanceto the courseKanttook in showingthe limitations of reason,although in a differentway sinceKant attemptedto reconcilethe position of the rationalistsand the empiricists (i.e. Descartesand Hume).’26 Even-tually, as it will be shownbelow In the sectionon Sufism,Al-Ghazzaliyy wanted to establish a faculty higher thanthat of reasonwhich drew on the same source of know-ledge as prophets.This stance of Al-Ghazzaliyy was anattempt to place prophecyabove reason,a position whichwasantogonisticto that of the Muslim philosopherswhoraisedreasonaboveprophecy.

122 M-Qur’an Suraal-Anblya’ 21:69 . Theversereads.‘Qulna ya narukunl bardan via salo,man ‘ala Ibrahfm”. The meaningof it is, “We(Mlah) said, 0 Fire! Be cool andpeacefor Ibrahim.

123 Al-Ghazzallyy. Tahafut,pp. 243—247.124 Marmurah,p. 186.125 M-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Munqklh.pp. 117-118.126 In addition to theabovesimilarity betweenKant andM-Ghazzaliyy.

althoughnot identical there are other mutual Interestsof boththinkers. Kant statesIn the critique of PureReasonthat he wasseekingto provide room for faith and morality, a position that iscelebratedin muchofAl-Ghazzaliyy’swritings.

87

AL-GHAZZLIYY

It hasbeensuggestedthat A1-Ghazzãliyywas affectedin a more substantiveway by his review and subsequentcritique of philosophy. One of his students.Abü Bakr IbnAl-’Arabiyy, assertedthat his teacher“entered inside thephilosophersandwantedto exitbutcouldn’t’.’” In addition,among contemporaries,Badawi holds that A1-Ghazzãliyywas always faithful to philosophy and that he was anAristotelian for some time before he ended up a neo-Platonist.’25 However, the findings of Hava Lazarus-Yafeh,who studied the works of Al-Ghazzàliyy from a philolo-gical point of view and used philosophical terms as acriterion of authenticity in his writings shed doubt upontheseinterpretations.She said that the common medievalphilosophicalterms(whichweremostly Neoplatonic.but toa certainextentalsoAristotelian) wereentirely absentfromthose books by Al-Ghazzãliyy which scholars acceptedas authentic books written by him. Only in those of hisbookswhich dealt with description or refutation of philo-sophical doctrines, such as his Maqasid, Tahãfut, Mihakal-Nazar, Mi’yãr at- ‘Jim and to a lesserdegreealso Mizàrtat- ‘Amal, did this terminology appear. Moreover, afterstating that Al-Ghazzãliyy was well versed in philoso-phical doctrines and knew their technical terminologybetterthan anyMuslim theologianbeforehim, sheadded:

“Yet here is a mostastonishinglinguistic factthat in alargenumberof his booksincluding his major works,thereis nowhereany useof asinglephilosophicalterm,evenwhenAl-Ghazzãliyydealswith typical metaphysi-cal subjectsandnot in the usualorthodoxway.”29

It should be noted here that Lazarus-Yafehexcludedsome books whoseauthenticity was disputed. She main-tained that these books, which did include philosophicalterms, could have been possibly written by one of threegroups. First, admirerswho wantedto expoundAl-Ghaz-zaliyy’s ideaswhile at the sametime incorporating philo-

127 Ibn Taymiyyah, Ivaqd al-Mantiq (Cairo; Maktabat Ai-Sunnah M-Muhammadiyyah,19511 p. 56.

128 Hadawi. Dawr al- ‘Arab ii Takwin al-Fikr aI-Awrubblyy (Al-Kuwait;wakalat al-Matbu’at, 19791pp. 203—205.

129 Lazarus-Yafeh,p. 249.

88

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE.,,PUBLIC TEACHING

sophical notions from other sourcesthat they admiredas well; second,unknown authorswho wantedtheir ownbooks to survive by attributing them to famous scholars;third, enemiesof Al-Ghazzaliyywho wantedto paint a dis-torted pictureof him, Nevertheless,Lazarus-Yafehadmittedthat the authenticity of books should not be basedonlyon stylistic or linguistic criteria.’30

3,7 AL-GHAZZALfl’Y’S SEARCH CONTINUES;THE CONFRONTATION WITH THE ESOTERICS(AIrBAINIYYAR)

When he was done with the philosophers,Al-Ghazzãliyyturnedto theBOilniyyahwho flourishedduring his life time.Not only was he interestedin their methodology,but healso found himself confronting them politically. TheCaliph requestedthat Al-Ghazzaliyy write a book aboutthe veracity of their beliet showing that the Batiniteswere perceivedas a threat to the central governmentinBaghdad. Upon this requestfrom the Caliph, which Al-Ghazzaliyy considereda motivation from without addedto the original one from within, he soughtthe Batlnites’sbookand treatises.Moreover,he assertedthat, during thattime, he wasalreadyawareof someof their newly Inventedvocabulary and statements,which were different fromthoseof their predecessors.131

In preparationfor his researchin this area.Al-Ghaz-zaliyycollectedandorganizedtheBatinite’s statementsandviews. His presentationof theseviews promptedone of hiscontemporaries,whom Al-Ghazzaliyy referred to as “oneof the peopleof truth” (bad aid al-haq), to denouncewhathe called an exaggeration (mubdlaghah) in the extentAl-Ghazzaliyy took in reporting their belief. He held thatAl-Ghazzaliyy helpedthe Batinites to a degreethat theythemselvescouldnotmatch.’32Al-Ghazzaliyyreactedto this

130 Lazarus-Yafeh,pp. 255—257.131 Ai-Ghazzaiiyy, aL-Munqldh, p. 118. For further information on this

historical period seep. 22.132 A1-Ghazzallyynarratedthatasimilar criticismwasdirectedby Ahmad

Ibn Hanbal toward Ai-Harith Ai-Muhasibiyy when the latter res-pondedto theMu’tazilaft Al-Ghaizaliyy, A!-Munqidh, pp. 118-119.

89

AL-GHAZZALIYY

criticism by saying that it could havebeencorrect if thebeliefs of the Batiniteswerenotalreadyknown. Howeverinthis casetheir views hadbeenpreviously disseminated.’33

In addition,Ai-GhazzäliyysaidthattheBatinitesclaimedthat no authors (musanr4ft1n)at the time understoodtheirarguments. Hence, Al-Ghazzaliyy found it appropriate toexplaintheir argumentsbeforecriticizing them,anapproachsimilar to his treatmentof the philosophers.A1-Ghazzaliyysaid that he did not wantanyoneto think that he criticizedthe Batinlteswithout understandingthem.’34

Accordingto theBatinites,therewasaneedfor learningand a teacher,yet not every teacherwas equippedto dis-seminateknowledgewhich could be acquiredonly throughthe inffalible (ma’sürn) teacher or Imam. A.l-Ghazzallyymaintainedthat the causeof the Batinites flourished be-causethose who arguedagainst the principles advocatedby the Batinites were “ignorant”. He thought that theirpremiseswere true but their conclusion was false. Al-Ghazzàliyyfound that the problemwasin arguingagainstthe true premissesrather than the falseconclusion.’35Headdedthat one should questionthe knowledge that theyclaim to have acquired, and he did. Not only they couldnotanswerhis questions,they did not understandthem inthe first place,and that wasexactlywhy theywould returnto the notion that only the infallible Imam would know theanswer.Al-Ghazzaliyy basedhis discoursewith the Ba-tinites uponnumeroushistorical occurences.’36

Al-Ghazzaliyy criticized the Batinites in severalbookswritten during the differentstagesof his life beginningwiththe first period of public teaching. He wrote the fIrst, Al-Mustazldriyy, at the requestof the Caliph Al-Mustazhir,(after whom It wasnamed).This was followed by Hujjat a!-Haq (TheProofof theTruth), which waswritten asa directresponseto the argumentsof Batinites which he encoun-teredin Baghdad.After leavinghis position at theNizãmiy-yah, he wrote Mufo.ssllal-KhutUf (The Clarifier of the Dis-

133 A1-Ghazzaliyy,AI-Munqidh, p. 118.134 Ibid., pp. 118—119.135 Ibid., p. 120.136 Ibid., p. 127,

90

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE.. PUBLIC TEACHING

agreement)which was written in reaction to their state-ments in Hamadtan and Al-Dad at-Marq&m b~al-Jadawit(TheAnnotatedScroll with Tabulars)which waswritten inanswer to their allegationsin Tus.’37 In addition, Al-Ghaz-zãliyy wrote At-Qistas al-Mustaqlm (The Correct Balance)which wasintendedasan indirect responseto theBatinitesby presenting an alternative source of knowledge otherthan their Infallible Imam. A1-Ghazzaliyy’s last written ex-poseof the Batinites, which took place during the secondperiod of public teaching,was in Al-Munqidh mm al-Data!where he devoted a chapter to criticizing them for thelast time.’38

Thereis anaccountin At-MunqidhwhereAl-Ghazzaliyycharacterizedthe position of the Batinites as part of thephilosophy of Pythagoras.Al-Ghazzãliyy probably heldAristotle in high regard becausehe criticized Pythagoras.Al-Ghazzaliyy learnedof this accountof Aristotle from thewritings of a secretivephilosophicalgroup called Ikhwanal-Safa’ (the Brethrenof Purity)~ It appearsthat Al-Ghaz-zãliyy did not see the strongrelationshipbetweenthe Ba-tinitesandIkhwanal-Safa’. However,thefirst fourchaptersof the forty-fourth letter reveal that both of them hadthe samestrategyfor disseminatingtheir belief.’40 In fact,it was arguedthat the Brethrenwere connectedwith theBatinitepropagandaagainsttheAbbasidcaliphate.M’ Oncehe recognizedthe truth about the Batinites, Al-Ghazzaliyy

137 Many scholars, have had a problem translating the title of thisbook. I think that theproblemarosefromtheir readingthestressed‘d’ of Al-Darj, which means ascroll, with aduminahandthusit becameal-Dun which means a small cabinet.‘Scroll’ makesmoresensethan‘cabinet’,

138 M-Ghazzallyy. Al-Muaqidh. p. 127.139 Ikhwan al-Safa’was a secret association of philosophers. It was

established at Basrah In 373 A.H./983 C.E. with a branch inBaghdad. They wrote fifty two treatiseswhichwerepresentedasanEncyclopedia.Thesecoveredmathematics,logic, metaphysics.mys-ticism, astrology,magicand thenaturalsciences.The BrethrenofPuritywereeclecticin their philosophywith borrowingsfromGreek,Indian, Persian.Jewish and Christian sources. Shelkh, IslamicPhilosophy,pp. 32-41.

140 Rasa’il Ikhwan al-Safa Wa KhiIlo,n al-Wafa (Dar Beirut; Beirut,1983) Vol. IV, pp. 14-40.

141 Sheikh,Islamic Philosophy,p. 33.

91

AL-GIIAZZLIYY

clearedthem from his path and continued his march inpursuit of truth.’42

3.8 AL-GHAZZS4LIYY BECOMING A SUP!

Sufism, or Islamic mysticismasit is sometimesreferred to,wasthe last classof seekersthat Al-Ghazzäliyyconsideredin his quest for true knowledge. He said that after hiscompletion of the study of the other sciences,he came tostudy turuq at-süflyyah (the ways of the Sufis). He knewthat their way could only be realized through knowledgeand activity together. By knowledge.Al-Ghazzaliyy meantthe theoreticalaspectof the Sufi way and by activity itsapplication.’43 Concerningthe relationshipbetweentheoryandpractice,A1-Ghazzaliyyofferedanexamplein which hesaid that there is a greatdifferencebetweenknowing thedefinition of health and being healthy. Analogous to thisis the gap between knowing what the reality of zuhd(asceticism)’44is andbeingan ascetic)45

SoonA1-Ghazzaliyyrealizedthat thetheoreticalpartofSufism was much easierthan its application. He startedacquiring knowledgeof the Sufi ‘way’ through readingthebooksof SufissuchasQftt aI-QulCtb) (TheFoodoftheHearts)by Abü Talib Al-Makkiyy (d. 388 A.H./998 C.E.) and thebooksofAl-Harith Al-Muhasibiyy (d. 243A.H7857CE.). Healsostudiedtheknownfragmentsof al-Junayd(d.297A.H. /909 C.E.), Al-Shibliyy (d. 334 A.H./945 C.E.) and AbüYaz!dAl-Bustamiyy(d. 264A.H./877C.E.Oamongothers.’46

None of Al-Ghazzallyy’s books ever mentioned thenamesof his Sufi mentors. In the referencesto his direct

142 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Afunqidh, pp. 128—129.143 Ibid., p. 130.144 Acccording to Ai-Wakil, there was only one verse in the Qur’an where

a noun participated in the same root of theword zuhd. In Qur’an12;20,itwasthewordzahidinwhichAl-WakiI thoughtittobenegativebecauseit meantmaking little of things which are the bounty ofAllah, and thus zuhdcould not be associatedwith somethingpo-sitive. ‘Abd al-RahmanAl-wakil, Hadhthi Hid Al-Sufflyyah (This isSufism). (Beirut; Dar al-Kutub aI-’Ilmlyyah, 1984)p. 136.

145 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh. p. 132.146 Ibid., pp. 130—132,

92

AL-GHAZZLIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE.. PUBLIC TEACHING

contactwith the Sufis, he only referred to them by meansof general terms such as the arbàb al-qulub wa al-mu-shahadat(men of hearts and vision) whom he consultedabouthis returnto teachinglateron inNishapur.’47Specificreferencesto the namesof his Sufi mentorscanbe foundin books of Sufis as Ibn ‘Ajibah who stated in his com-mentaryon FUsüsal-Hi!cantof Ibn ‘Ata’ Al-Sakandary,thatAl-Kharraz was Al-Ghazzãliyy’s mentor)48 In addition, Al-Subkiyy reported that Al-Fãramdhiyy influenced Al-Ghazzaliyy’sSufism.’4°It shouldbenotedthatAl-Faramdhiyywas placed in a sllstlah(a chain of Sufi mentors)afterAbuAl-Qasim Al-Jurjaniyy’5° under whom Al-Ghazzaliyystudiedjurisprudenceandwrote Al-Ta’Uiqah.’5’

Al-Ghazzaliyy attained whatever could be acquiredabout the ‘way’ of the Sufis throughlearning and listening(bi al-ta’allum waal-sama’).He realizedthat theypossessedspecial knowledge that could only be achievedthroughwhat the Sufis call dhawq (tasting),’52 ho.! (state, as in“ecstatic state”)’53and the changingof one’scharacter(i.e.becomingmoral),

At this stageandbeforeproceedingto show the impactof studying Sufism on his life, Al-Ghazzaliyy assertedthat

147 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Munqidh. p. 159.148 Ahmad lbn MuhammadIbn ‘Ajibah A1-l-iasaniyy. Iqaz al-Himarnfi

Sharhal-Hikam (Cairo; Abd al-}-Iamid AhmadHanafi.No Date)p. 28.149 Al-Subklyy, Vol. VI, p. 209.150 J. Trimingham, The SuJl Orders in Islam (London; Oxford University

Press, 1971) p. 262.151 A1-Subkiyy. Vol. VI, p. 195.152 Sufisusetheworddhawq. literallytasting,metaphoricallyto indicate

thatthereis akind of knowledgethattranscendsthephysicalrealityand which is available only through Immediateexperience.Al-Ghazzaliyymaintainedthat this kind of knowledgecannotbe ex-pressedlinguistically. In TheVarietiesofReligiousExperiences,williamJamesused“Ineffability” to expressthe Inadequacyof languagetoexpresstheknowledgeInvolved in mystical experiences.Ralphw.Clark, Introduction to Philosophical Thinking (St.Paul;westPublish-lngCo., 1987)p. 67.

153 Hal is the ecstatic statewhich is achievedby the Sufi throughconstantdhikr (recollectionof thename and attributesof Allah), Itis in this statethataSullstartsreceivingtranscendentalknowledge.If the Sufi can maintain such a hal, which denotesa senseoftemporality.it evolvesto becomea maqamwhichIndicatesthat theSufi took a permanentmetaphoricalresidencein transcendentalnoeticconditions,

93

AL-GHAZZALIYY

he had acquiredtrue belief ([mOn yaqfrdyy) in Allah, theprophecyand the day of judgment. He addedthat thesethree fundamentals of faith were firmly established inhis soul, not becauseof any specific formulated proof,but because of numerous reasons, circumstancesandexperiences.‘~

In orderto beon therightSufi ‘way and to gain eternalhappiness,AJ-Ghazzaliyyconcluded that he had to severhis tieswith wordly things; hehad to shunfameandmoneyand to flee from distracting attachments.He scrutinizedhis conditions and found himself devoid of activities thatcould be useful in the hereafter.Not eventhe bestof theseactivities, his teaching,was for the sakeof Allah which heconsideredthe criterion for success.He said his teachinghadbeenmotivatedby fame.Al-Ghazzal!yy realizedthat hewas aboutto fall Into Hell fire if he did not act fast.’55

Al-Ghazzãliyy spent six months, starting Rajab 488A.H./ 1095 C.E., trying to abandonall things thatwere notfor the sakeof Allah. This includedhisposition at the Nizä-miyyah which wasto no avail. He wastorn apartby worldli-nesson the onehandandthe motivationsfor the hereafteron the other. Eventually, he developedan impedimentofspeechwhich preventedhim from teaching.This impedi-ment causedhim sadnesswhich, in turn, brought with it anew problem;Al-Ghazzaliyycould not digestfoodor drink.Whenhe realizedhisweaknessandinability to makea de-cision, he soughtrefugeinAllah [S.W.T.] who facilitatedhisabandonmentof”fame, money,wife, childrenandfriends”.’56

A1-Ghazzaliyy knew that neither the Caliph nor hisfriends would approvehis plans to leave Baghdadand tosettle in Al-Sham.’57In addition, he was sure that none ofthe scholarsof Iraq would understandthe religious aspectof his plight. All of this led Al-Ghazzaliyy to plan his de-

154 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh, pp. 133—134,155 Ibid., p. 134.156 Ibid., p. 136.157 Thereare two placesidentified by thename,Al-Sham.Oneis the

areacoveredbyJordan,Lebanon,PalestineandSyria. lii thesecondinstance,It is usedasasynonymfor Damascus.Al-GhazzaliyyusedIt in the lattersense,

94

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFORKNOWLEDGE..PUBLIC TEAcHING

parturefrom Baghdadasif heweregoing to Makkahin orderto performpilgrimage.Al-Ghazzàliyydistributedhiswealth,keepingonly enoughto sustainhim andhis children andleft Baghdadwith the intention neverto seeit again. ThusconcludedAl-Ghazzaliyy’sfirst periodof public education,158

3.9 AL-GHAZZALIYY’S EPISTEMOLOGY IN HISWRITINGS ON ‘AQDAH (CREED)

According to Bouyges,Ai-Ghazzãliyy wrote four books on‘aqkiah towardsthe end of his first period of teaching:Al-Iqtisadftal-I’tiqUd (TheMedian Coursein Creed),Al-Rlsãlahal-Qudsiyyah ft Qawã’id at- ‘Aqa’id (The JerusalemiteTreatisein the Fundamentalsof Beliefs), Qawã4idal-’Aqã’td(TheFundamentalsof Beliefs)andal-Ma’anfat- ‘Aqliyyahwaal-Asrar al-Ilahiyyah (Rational Knowledge and divine Se-crets).’59 Thus, I cannot conclude this chapter withoutsome mentionof his thoughtregarding ‘aqldah. Indeed,hiswritings on ‘aqldah help to define Al-Ghazzaliyy’s episte-mology ashe conceivedof it Justbeforehe left Baghdad.

According to Badawl, Al-Risãlahal-QudsiyyahfT Qa-wa’id a!-’Aqã’id and Qawa’id at- ‘Aqã’id are the samebookand,as is indicated by the first title, this book must havebeenwritten originally aspartof Ilyd’ ‘(JIum al-Din in Jeru-salem after Al-Ghazzãliyy left Baghdad.’6°For this reasonsuchabookbelongsto thefollowingchapter.As for thefourthbook, Al-Ma’anf a!- ‘Aqliyyah wa al-Asrãr al-Ilahiyyah. it isstill in manuscript form and we know of it only throughsecondarysources.It includesfive chapters:on utterance(nutq),onKalamandthe Mutakallim,on speech(al-qawl) , onwriting andon the desiredgoal (al-gharad a!-mat!ub).’6’

Unfortunately, therefore, I am confined to discussingonly the first book, Al-Iqtisdd ft al-I’tiqad, which has a

158 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Munqldh, p. 137.159 Badawl, Muallafat, p. xvi,160 Ibid., pp. 89-92.161 Badawl, Mu’allafat, pp. 93-97. These chapter titles suggest this book

might shed considerable light on Al-Ohazza1iy~sphilosophicalpositionsat this time in general and his philosophyof languagein particular.A thoroughstudyof this work of Al-Ghazzaliyywouldbe mostdesirable,

95

AL-GuAzzLivy

short, yet very important introduction in relation to thetopic of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s epistemology.The main themesofthis bookarethe proofof the existenceof Allah [S.W.T.] andhis attributes (in which he followed the method of theAsha’irites).162the proof of the prophecy of Muhammad[S.A.A.S.J, anddiscussionof otherarticlesof faith.’63 In thepenultimate section of this book, Al-Ghazzaliyy discussedthe need of designating a ruler (Imamll; he proved thenecessityof havingarulerby reasonaswell asfrom thetextsof the Shari’ah.’64He endedthis book with a section thatsum-marizedhis position towardsall otherreligions, sectsandgroupsthat werepredominantat the time.165

In the introductionto Al-tqtisdd,Al-Ghazzaliyyassertedthat there could be no contradictionbetweenthe Sharl’ahand reason(Ia mu’anadatabaynaa!-shar’ al-manqUlWaat-haq al-ma’qüfl. He classified all other positions into twocategories:those who restricted themselvesto conformism(taqlld) which he describedas a deficiency(tafrft); and,thephilosophersand the extremists among the Mu’tazlliteswho relied on reasononly. The latter position he regardedas an excess(~frat).For Al-Ghazzãllyy, neither reasonnorShari’ah suffices on its own, for the right group is thatwhich brings reasonand Shari’ah together.Al-Ghazzaliyyexplainedhis positionby the following metaphor:

“Reasonis similar to ahealthyvisionand theQur’anIssimilar to the bright sun.The onewho seeksguidancein one of them without the other is certainly amongthe stupid. If he thinks that the light of the Qur’ansufficeshim without reason,then he is comparabletothe one who exposeshimself to the light of the sunwith hiseyelidsshut,thenthereisno differencebetweenhim and the blind, for (the existenceof) reasonwithShari’ahis like light uponlight.”~°

Thus,onecansaythat it wasAl-Ghazzaliyy’s intention

162 For more details on A1-Ghazzaliyrs relationship to the Asha’iritesseepage 32.

163 A1-Ghaizaliyy, Al-Iqtiso4 p. 13.164 Ibid., pp. 195—201.165 Ibid.. pp. 205—213.166 Ibid., pp. 7--S.

96

AL-GIiAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE..PUBLICTEACHING

in Al-Iqtisad to present a “median” account of Islamiccreed,which is the meaningof the title of this book, withthehelp of reason,

In A1-!qtisãd, Al-Ghazzaliyy restricted himself to theuse of six sourcesof premises.Thesesourceswere listedasfollow:

1. The sensibles(al-hissiyyat~:A1-Ghazzãliyyheredefinedthe sensiblesas that which is perceivedthrough ex-ternal andinternal “witnessing” (mushahadah).Exam-ples of externalare accidents(a’rad) like soundsandcolors,andinternal like the presenceof pain andjoy.

2, PureReason(at- ‘aql al-mahd): an exampleof this kindof knowledge is reaching the conclusion that therecould be no third predicateto those in the premise,“the world is either eternalor accidental”.

3. Knowledge related by several sources (al-tawatur):such as the testimony of the existence of certainprophets(eg. Mosesla.s.P.

4. Premisesthat comprise other premisesthat are de-pendentupon the abovethreesources.

5. TheShari’ah (aI-sam’iyyat).

6. Premises derived from the beliefs of opponents inargumentsagainst them becausethey cannot denythem, evenif there is no proofof its validity.167

It should be noted that Al-Ghazzaliyy criticized theMutakallimürt for their usageof argumentsthat resemblethe sixth categoryabovewhich he consideredconformism(taqlLd))68In addition, the factthathe“restricted” himselftothe use of these six sourcesis a clear indication that acompletelist is availablein a previousbook. In fact Mi’yãr

167 AI-Ghazzaliyy.Al-Iqtisod. pp. 25—27.168 Ibid., p. 92.

97

AL-GHAZZALIYY

at- ‘urn is the last book during the first period of publicteachingto include a comprehensivelist of the sourcesofknowledge; subsequentbooks (i.e. Mihak aI-No,zarand Al-Iqtisad ft al-I’tiqddj i’ncluded partial lists only. Mihak at-Na,zar included seven sourcesof “knowledge and belief’;primary knowledge, internal “vision” (al-mushñhadatat-batinah), external sensibles,experimentals,knowledgere-lated by many groups (tawatur), imaginationand famouspremises.’69

A1-Ghazzaliyy listed in Mt’yar at- ‘tim four sourcesthat yield indubitable knowledge; pure rational logicalnecessities(al-uwwaliyyat aI-’aqliyyah al-mahdah), thesensible, the experimentalsand intuition (hads). His listdiffered from that of the philosophers in Maqasic! Al-Faias{fah only in the addition of intuition as a sourceofindubitableknowledge.Heheldthat theknowledgeacquiredthrough intuition cannotbe proved, cannotbe denied,andcannotbe taught. It mustbe for this reasonthat he did notinclude intuition in the sourcesof premisesin AI-Iqtisdd.A1-Ghazzaliyystatedthat the only thing that can be doneto the student who is seeking intuitive knowledge Is todirect him to the samepath which led those before himto intuitive knowledge. This guidance does not guranteeintuitive knowledge; the student’smind should be perfectin terms of strengthandclarity In order to be ableto haveintuition. Although he held intuition to be a source ofindubitable knowledge,Al-Ghazzallyysaid that onecannotuse arguments from intuition in debates; one shouldshare the experience.For him, this conceptof sharing issimilarto “tasting”.’7°Thelatteranalogyis a clearindicationofAl-Ghazzãliyy’s useof the Silfi languagewhich is a markof thenew direction that he choseto follow.

3.10 CONCLUSION

Al-Ghazzaliyy’swritings during this period,which lastedfora decade,reflect one of the most Important stagesIn hisintellectual development.He brokewith conformismwhichdominatedhis work as a student, andbegana systematic

169 Al-Ghazza1i~,Mihak, pp. 57-65.170 Ibid.. pp. 178—182.

98

AL-GI-IAZZALIYY’S QUESTFORKNOWLEDGE..PUBLICTEACHING

inquiry of the schoolsof thought that wereavailableat thetime in searchfor true knowledgeand its sources.

Al-Ghazzaliyyencounteredmany schoolsof thoughtinhis questfor true knowledge.Eventually, he restricted thepossibility of finding such knowledge to four “classesofseekers”: the dialectical theologians, the Batinites, thephilosophersand the Süfis whosemethodologyhe finallyaccepted.A carefulstudyof the languagethatAl-Ghazzàliyyusedto describethesefour group revealsthat he narrowedthem to two only; the Bãtinites and the philosophersinone group, and the Mutakallimun and the SufIs in theother. The choiceof words reflects a subtleapprovalof thelatter group.

When Al-Ghazzaliyy becamea teacher at the NiZa-miyyah of Baghdad,hestartedstudyingphilosophy aspartof asystematicapproachinwhichhewasattemptingto studyall sects,religions andschoolsof thoughtin searchfor trueknowledge.Accordingto him, he could notfind suchknow-ledge in all the traditional subjectsof philosophy; the onlytwo exceptionswere logic and mathematics.Although hewas critical of philosophy, we shall see in the followingchapter that he adoptedmany positionsfrom the works ofthe philosophers(e.g., Al-FarabO.

One of the most important contributions of Al-Ghazzaliyy during this period is his position on logic. Hewrote severalbooks which he intended as a criterion forscience. He held in Mi’y&r a!-’lIm that every personhasthree judges:a judge of sensibles,a judge of imaginationand a judge of reason. It is the addition of a “judge ofimagination” here that contributes to the developmentofhis geneticepistemologyeventhoughhewould drop it lateron in Ai-Mwiqtdh.

Another contributionwas in the subjectof debate.Inwhat seemsto be a reaction to a trend of public debatesbetweenthe various schoolsof jurisprudenceat the lime,Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote four books in which he outlined theetiquette of debate (adab al-munO,zarah) without whichan unhealthy atmosphereof animosity and hatredwouldarise.Herealizedthatthesedebates,inwhich heparticipatedat the Campof NizamAl-Mulk, weremotivatedby material

99

AL-GHAZZALIYY

gains and therefore, he made a pledge later on never toengagein suchactivity again.

Al-Ghazzãliyy’s gearch for indubitable knowledge ledhim to reject all knowledge that was basedon authority(e.g.,parents,teachers)which heblamedfor thedifferencesamong people. He defined this knowledge in terms ofmathematicalcertitude. He scrutinizedall his cognition insearchfor knowledge that would meet the previous des-cription; he thought for a while that the sensiblesand theself evident truths are conforming to the level of certitudethat hewaslooking for. Nevertheless,meditatinguponsuchknowledgehe found that he could doubt them, and thushe found himself devoid of any indubitable knowledge.As a result, he found himself doubting all sources ofknowledge including reason which was based upon thepossiblity of the existence of a higher faculty which hedefined in terms of its relation to reason (i.e. the facultyabove reason [malakahfawqa ai-’aqlj). In fact, he under-went the most genuineand dramatic experienceof skep-ticism in thehistoryofthought.Thisstateof doubtcontinuedfor the duration of two months and eventually endedbydivine illumination.

The first thing that Al-Ghazzãliyy regainedafter heemergedfrom his stateof doubt was his trust in logicalnecessities,According to him, this would not havebeenpossiblewithout divine illumination which he consideredasource of knowledge that he called kashf and which hedescribedas acquiringknowledgedirectly (i.e. from Allah).Evidently, this latter sourceof knowledgeforms the back-bone of SOfi epistemology; he would expand on thisconcept during his first period of withdrawal from publiclife which I will dealwith in the following chapter.

100

Chapter FOUR

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE YEARS OF SECLUSION(488-499A.H./1095-1 106 C.E.)

This chapter deals with the works Al-Ghazzâliyy wrotefollowing his first withdrawal from public life, a periodwhich extendedfrom the time he brought his first teachingcareer to an end at the Nizãmiyyah of Baghdad in 488A.H./ 1095 CE. and until his return to public teachingatthe Nizãmiyyah of Nishapur in 499 A.H./ 1106 CE. Thisperiodof seclusionwasmarkedby a longjourney in whichAl-Ghazzaliyy left Baghdadfor Damascusfrom which hewentto Jerusalem,thento Hebronforashortvisit andeven-tually to Makkah andMadinahbeforehe decidedto returnto his homeland.’

During this time, Al-Ghazzallyywrote 28 books,lettersand treatises2of which four were written in Farsi: Klmyã

1 A1-Gharzzaliyy.Al-Munqidh,pp. 137-138.2 Theseare: 1. Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din, 2. ICitabflMas’alatKulMujtahidMusib,

3. Jawabha Mu’ayyad Al-Mulk HinamaDa’ahuLimu‘awadauaI-Tath-isBitNizamiyyak 4. Mufassllat KhUaf~5. Jawabol-Masa’Uat-Arba’ at-LatiSa’atahaat-BatlnlyyahBthamadhan,6. Al-Maqsadal-AsnaSharhAsma’Allah al-Husna, 7. RisalahjI Ruju’ Asrna’ Allah ha Dhat WahidahAlaRa’yat-Mu’tazilah maat-Faiaslfsak 8. Bldayatal-Htdayak 9. AI-Wajiz,10. JawahU-at-Qur’an, 11. Al-Arba’Infi Usul al-Din, 12.At-Mo.dnun ‘bUtt‘ala GhayriAhltht, 13. Al-Madnunbthi ala AhIthi, 14. At-Dan a1-Marqumbi at JadawU, 15. Al-Qtstasat-Mustaqlni, 16. Fatsalol-Tafriqah baynal-Islam ma al-Zandaqak 17. Al-Qanurz ol-Kullt fi at-Ta’wtt 18. KlxnyaSa’adat 19. Ayyuhaal-Watad, 20. Nasthatal-Muluk. 21. ZadAkhrat,22, Risatah Ha Abi al-Fath Ahmad hint Satamahal-Dlniamiyy in atMust!, 23, At-Risalah aI-Ladunniyyah,24. Risalahha Ba’dAhI ‘Asrih,25. Mishkatal-Anwar, 26. Tafstr Yaqut ol-Ta’wlL 27, At-Kashfmaat-Tabyinji Ghw-ur at-Khalq Ajma’in, 28. Tatbis Ibtis.

101

AL-CHAZZALIYY

Sa’ãdat (TheAlchemyof Happiness),3 ZadAkhrat(ThePackfor the Hereafter,which Al-Ghazzãliyywrote asa simplifiedversionof the precedingbook to makeit moreaccessibletothe generalpublic). Ayyuhaal-Walad (0 Child) andAI-TibraI-MasbükftNailat aI-Mulülc (The Golden Ingot for Advi-sing Kings). The latter two are translatedinto ArabicA’ Ofthesetwenty eight books, two are in manuscriptform,5 fivelost6 andanothertwo of disputedauthenticity.7In addition,two works that are usually listed separatelywereoriginallysections of other books: Risbiahft Rujü’ Asma’ Alibi, HaDhdt Wahidah ala Ra’y aj-Mu’taztlah wa a1-Fa1ds~fah(ATreatiseConcerningAllah’s namesIndicating OneEssenceAccording to the Opinion of the Mu’tazilites and the Philo-sophers)which is the third chapterof Al-MaqsadaI-AsnãSharhAsmà’ Allah aI-Husnà(The Sublime Aim in the In-terpretation of Allah’s Beautiful Names)8and Al-Arba’inJI Usitl al-Din (The Forty in the Fundamentalsof Religion)which is the third sectionof Jawàhir al-Qur’art (TheJewelsof the Qur’an).9

3 This book is different from the Arabic one which has the sametitle:Kimya’ at-Sa’adah. Badawl stated that Bouygesdoubted the authen-ticity of thesectiondesignatedforbooksthat theirauthenticitycouldnotbe verified. Medieval historians like AI-Murtada Al-Zubaydiyy listedtheArabic book separetely.The original book in Farsi is believed to bethe equivalent of hhya’ ‘Ulurn al-Din (The Revival of Islamic Sciences)which was written In Arabic. For further information, see Badawi,Mu’attafat, pp. 172—178 and 275—276.

4 Badawi, Mu’attafat, pp. 188—189.5 TheseareZadAkhrat and At-Wajtz.6 Theseare FL Mas’atatKutMujtahtd Musth,Mufassilal-KhUaf At-DarJ at-

Marqumbi at-Jadawit,Tafstr Yaqutat-Ta’wUandTalbis Ibtis. It shouldbenoted that lbn A1-Jawziyy (d. 597 AR.! 1200 C.E., who studied at thehandsofJudgelbn Al-’Arabiyy. oneofA1-Ghazzaliyy’sstudents,wroteabook with the same title as the latter book: Tatbis Iblis (The Devil’sConcealmentof Truth). In this book, which I believeit be influencedbythe original Tatbis Ibtis. one could see that lbn Al-Jawziyy used thesame example in the introduction that was usedpreviously by Al-Ghazzaliyy In the introduction of At-Iqtisad. Nevertheless. lbn Al-Jawziyyfollowed themethod of thescholarsof Hadith which is differentfrom the approachof Al-Ghazzaliyy. For further information seeAbuAl-Faraj ‘Abd A1-Rahman Ibn A1-Jawziyy Al-Baghdadiyy. Talbis Ibtis,Muhammad Munir Al-Dimashqiyy A1-Azhariyy. ed. (cairo: MaktabatAi-Mutanabbiyy, No Date) p. 1.

7 TheseareNasthatal-Mutuk andaI-MadnunbUtt ‘ala GhayriAhtih.8 Badawi,Mu’atlafat, p. 137,9 Ibid., p. 149.

102

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THEYEARS OF SECLUSION

In addition to the traditional subjectsthat he usedtocover in his writings, Al-Ghazzaliyystarted expressinghisdeepconviction in the Sufi way. His writings were eitherdirectrepresentationsof thisnew line of thought, or indirectasin thetexts(e.g., exegesisof theQur’an)hewrotewith the

spirit of Sufism during his years of seclusion.It is the aimof this chapter to discussthe impact of his acceptanceofSufism on his epistemology. Of the many books that hewrote during this period, only about sevenof them can berelated directly to the developmentin his theory of know-ledge. Theseare: Ihyã’ ‘UIüm al-Din (TheRevival of IslamicSciences),Al-Maqsad al-Asnã ft Sharh Asmã’ Allah al-Husnã, Bidayat Al-Hidãyah (The Beginning of Guidance)Jawãhir al-Qur’an and Al-Qistas al-Mustaqirn (The JustBalance), Al-Risãlah al-Ladunniah and Mishkät al-Anwàr(TheNichefor Lights).

Thesebooksform a consistentunified wholewith “un-veiling” (kashj) forming thehighestsourceof knowledge.Weshall seethat “unveiling” takesmore than one form (e.g.,vision) but always aiming at peremptory transcendentalknowledge.Thus, the following discussionof thesebooksaims at showing Ai-Ghazzaliyy’s consistencyduring thisperiod.

4.1 IIIYA’ ‘FJLEJM AL-DIN

Thefirst book that waswritten in seclusionwas Ihyã’ ‘Ulümal-Dn (TheRevivalof Islamic Sciences),avoluminousency-clopedic work. 10 In this book, A1-Ghazzaliyyheld that thehighest forms of knowledgeare found In Sufism and thatall otherformsaresubordinate,He arguedfor thepriority ofSufi knowledgealong several different fronts, namely thescienceofaction(‘ilmaL-rnu’ãmalalt) , sociologyof knowledge,thedivision ofthesciences,the intellect, dialecticaltheology(lcalãm), philosophy,creed(‘aqidah) anddreams.However,as we shall see, his newly attained vision produced an

10 The edition of Dar at-Ma’r~fakwithout the indexes or appendixes,has1,700pages.

103

AL-GHAZZALIYY

enthusiasmwhich led him to set forth severalflawed argu-mentsandclaimsin supportof his position. Someof theseflaws wereovercomein his laterwritings.

4.1.1. On the Scienceof Action (‘Jim al-Mu’amalah)

As the title of this book indicates,Al-Ghazzãliyy wantedtorevive the Islamic Sciences,an intention which he clearlystatesin thefirst few linesof theintroduction,11Theconceptof “revivification” should be understoodasan act directedtowardssomethingwhich is deador dying. In this case,hewas referring to the Islamic scienceswhich becamedis-tancedfrom the original aims of the Shari’ah (maqasida!-shari’ah). He sawthat Muslim scholars,especiallyin Juris-prudence,preoccupiedthemselveswith trivial and uselessdetails,forgettingthe spirit of the Shari’ah.TheIhyã’ repre-sents an attempt to reconnectF’iqh with the aims of theShari’ah.

In the introduction to the Ihyà’, which is consideredAl-Ghazzaliyy’s most important work, he stated that thenecessaryknowledgefor attaininghappinessin thehereafter(‘tim al-akhirah) Is divided into two sections:the scienceofaction (‘tim al-mu’amaiahl and the science of “unveiling”divine knowledge (‘tIm al-mukàshafaii). He restricted thesubjectmatterof Ihya’ ‘Ulüm al-Din to the scienceof actionbecause,asheput it, he hadno permissionto disclose ‘tImai-muk&shafahin any books, eventhough it is the goal towhich seekersaspire. He said that his position had toresemblethat of the prophets12who related this scienceusingmetaphoriclanguagebecausepeoplearenotequippedto understandthis subject. He addedthat the scienceofactionis theguide(i.e.aprerequisite)to ‘tlmal-mukãshafalt13

Al-Ghazzallyy divided the scienceof action into two

11 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Ihyu’ ‘Ulum at-Din (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rlfah. No Date)vol.1, p.1.

12 Al-Ghazzaliyy basedhis posItion upon a 1-ladith that was narratedby Abu Al-Darda’ in which prophet MuhammadIS.A.A.S.I said. Schol-ars arethe heirs of prophets”(At- ‘utama’ warathatal-anbiya’). ThisRadithbwasverified by Abu Dawud,Al-Tirmldhiyy, lbn MaJahandIbnHayyanin his Sahth,

13 Al-Ghazzaliyy, lhya’. Vol. I, pp. 3-4.

104

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARSOFSECLUSION

sections: exoteric science(‘tim zàhtr) and esoteric science(‘tim bãttn), Furthermore, he divided each of these twosectionsinto two subdivisions.Thesefour sectionsformedthe basis for the format of Ihyd’ ‘tJiUm aI-EJlit which com-prises, in his words, four quarters: the Acts of Worship(‘tbàdat), the Social Ethics (‘adãt), the Matters that areDangerous(muhltkãt) and finally the Things that are Con-duciveto Salvation(munjiyàt).14Eachof thesefourquartersincludes ten chapters.A generaloverviewof this book canbe obtainedfrom a list of the headingsof the chapters:

The quarteron the Acts of Worship:

1. The Bookof Knowledge (Kitdb al- ‘lIm)

2, TheArticles of Faith (Qawa’id aI-’AqEftcl)

3. TheMysteriesof Purity

4. The Mysteriesof Prayer

5. TheMysteries of Alms giving

6. TheMysteriesof Fasting

7. TheMysteriesof Pilgrimage

8. TheRules of Readingthe Qur’an

9. On the InvocationsandSupplications

10. On the Arrangementof Awràd15According to theDifferentTimes.

The quarteron Social Ethics:

1, The Ethics of Eating

2. The Ethics of Marriage

14 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’, Vol. I, pp. 2—3.15 WU-d (plural awradj is one or more form of recollection of Allah (dhtkn-

In a Suti order, the novice (rnurtcl) is assigned certain wird to performby his own Sufi master.Nabih Amin Fails translatedthetitle of thetenthchapterofthefirst quarter as “On the Office of portions’, a trans-lation which does not reflect the subject matter of this chapter. Al-Ghazzaliyy. The Book of Knowledge (of Ihya’ ‘Ilium at-Din), Nabih AminFans. ed. andtrans. (Lahore, Sh. MuhammadAshraf, 1962) p. 3.

105

AL-GHAZZALIYY

3. The Ethics of Earninga Livelihood

4. On the Lawful and the Forbidden

5. The Ethics of Companionship and Fellowshipwith theVarious ‘l~pesof Men

6, On Seclusion(al- ‘uziah)

7. The Ethics of Travel

8. On Audition (samä’)andpassion(wajd~6

9. On Enjoining GoodandForbidding Evil

10. TheEthics of Living asExemplified in theVirtuesof the Prophet

The quarteron the Mattersthat are Dangerous:

1. On the Wondersof the Heart

2. On the Discipline of the Soul

3. On the Curseof the Two Appetites- theAppetitesof theStomachand the Genitals

4. TheCurseof theTongue

5. TheCurseof Anger, Rancourand Envy

6. TheEvil of theWorld

7. TheEvil of Wealth andNiggardliness’7

8. TheEvil of PompandHypocrisy

9. TheEvil of Pride andConceit

10. The Evils of Vanity

16 Fails translated wajd as “grief”. SeeAl-Ghazzaliyy, TheBookof Know-tedge,p. 4. I think that wajd is an ecstatic exptession of the psycholo-gical “state” (boO of a Sufi. which is the outcome of listenIng topoetry or singing. This “state’ could be either that of grief or joydependingon the themein thesongor poetry. In addition,a Sufl caninduce sucha “state” but in this caseIt Is called tawajud.

17 Fads translated bukhlasavarice.SeeAl-Ghazzali. TheBookof Know-ledge, p. 5.

106

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THEYEARS OFSECLUSION

The quarter on ThoseThings That are ConducivetoSalvation:

1. On Repentance

2. On PatienceandGratitude

3. On Fearand Hope

4. On PovertyandAsceticism

5. On Divine Unity andDependence

6. On Love, Longing, IntimacyandContentment

7. On Intentions,Truthfulnessand Sincerity

8. On Self-ExaminationandSelf-Accounting

9. On Meditation

10. On Death.

After listing the contentsof the Ihyà’, Al-Ghazzãliyyoutlinedthe specificalmsof eachof thefour quarters.Moreimportant than the aims themselvesIs the languagethatAl-Ghazzãliyyusedto describetheseaims. More thanonce,he mentioned the “mysteries”, “secrets” and the “hidden”elementsthat wereneglectedin previousstudiesandwhichhe now intendsto resolveor clarif~’.15It is clear that thislanguagewhich is differentfrom previousworksof Al-Ghaz-zaliyy, canbe attributed to his newintellectual “state”!

Thefirst quarter,on theactsofworshipping,beganwiththebook of knowledge(Ktttth ai-’Iim) asits first chapter.It isratherpeculiar to includesuchachapter,let aloneassignitpriority, amongotherchapterson subjectssuchasprayer,almsgiving andpilgrimage. Theuseof Jurisprudence(e.g.thedetailsof prayer)is not essentialto the aim of the Ihyã’:knowing that studentsat the time were interestedin juris-prudence,A1-Ghazzãliyy included it in his book to attractthem.19 Evidently he was aiming at presentinghis newly“acquired” understandingof knowledge and the methodor “way” to acheiveit. He wasconvincedthat peopleat the

15 PJ-Ghazzali,The Bookof Knowledge.p. 5.19 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’, Vol. I, p. 4.

107

AL-GHAZZALIYY

time were inclined to acceptas sciencewhat he describedmetaphoricallyasthe“peels” insteadof thepulp”.2°Onecaninterpret these“peels” as the uselessor harmful sciences,and the “pulp” asthe peremptoryknowledge(yaqlrt) that isunveiledto the Sufi.

The aim of discussingknowledgeat the beginning ofthe Ihyã’ is intendedto showthe knowledgethat is requiredof everyone. It is obvious that Al-Ghazzãliyy is referring toa hidden knowledgethat cannot be derived from conven-tional sourcesof knowledge (e.g. the senses,reason),Hewantedthe seekerto transcendworldly affairs which con-structa barrierthat preventsonefrom achievingthe know-ledge that Sufis claim to haveacquired.He assertedthatattainment of this knowledgecan be promoted by “self-mortification, discipline, and through puri1~ringthe heartby freeing it from theaffairs of this world, aswell asthroughemulating the prophetsandvery virtuous people(awliyd’)sothat it may be revealedto every seekerin proportion towhat Allah has allocated (rizq) for him, rather than inproportion to the seeker’sefforts and labours paM). yetdiligencein it is indispensablefor self-mortificationwhichis the sole key to guidance.”2’

The book of knowledge(Kitëzb at- ‘Jim) comprisessevensections: 1. On the value of knowledge, instruction andlearning. 2. On the branchesof knowedgewhich arefard‘ayn:22 on the branchesof knowledgethat are fard kifa-yah:23 on the definition of jurisprudence and dialecticaltheology (as disciplines) in the scienceof religion: and onthe scienceof the hereafterand that of this world. 3. Onwhat is popularly but erroneouslyconsideredto be part ofthe scienceof religion, including a discussionof the natureof blameworthyknowledge.4. On thedefectsof debateandthe reasonswhy people haveengagedin dissensionand

20 Al-Ghazzaliyy, lhya’, Vol.1, p.2.21 Al-Ghazzali, TheBookofKnowtedge,p.100.22 Divinely ordained, and binding for every individual Muslim.23 Divinely ordained, and binding for the Muslim community as a

whole. Therefore this collective ohigation can be discharged, for thecommunity by the actions of one or more persons, andis not neces-sarily binding for each individual member.

108

AL-GHAZZALIYY”S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OFSECLUSION

disputation.5. On the qualitiesof the teacherandthe stu-dent. 6. On the deficiencyof knowledge,the (drawbacks)ofthe learned, and the characteristics distinguishing thescholarsof the scienceof the hereafterfrom those of thescienceof this world. 7, On reason,its value, categories,andwhat hasbeensaid concerningit (in tradition).24Of theseseven,sectionsone,two andsevenareof specialimportancein the developmentof Al-Ghazzàliyy’s epistemology.

4.1.2 The Sociology of Knowledge

In the first sectionof the bookof knowledge,Al-Ghazzãliyydiscussedthe importanceof knowledgeand ranked thescholars,after the prophets, who were secondto none.25The implication of this hierarchycan be explainedas anattempt by him to place revelation as the first sourceof knowledge and reason second.This position was hisresponseto the philosophers who placed reason aboveprophecyin their epistemologicalhierarchy.

Moreover, he raised the questionof the definition ofman whom he distinguished from animals by virtue ofhavingthe faculty of reason.In addition, he statedthat thehuman being was createdonly for the sake of acquiringknowledge (lam yukhlaqWa lit ‘tIm) ,26

Al-Ghazzàliyydiscussedthe knowledgeof sciencethatcould be renderedfard ‘ayri andhe found that thereweretwenty different positions regarding this issue. He men-tioned only four groupsalongwith their positionsregardingfard ‘aga. TheMutakkalimünsaid that this sciencemust bedialectical theology, the jurists maintainedthat fiqh wasthefard ‘ayn, the scholarsof Hadith statedthat it was theknowledgeof the Qur’an and the Sunnah,and the fourthgroup was the Sufis who while being different from theother threepositions,did not compriseone single positionin their understandingof fard ‘ayn. One group of Sufisstated that it is the knowledgeof one’s “state” that) andposition (maqdm)in relation to Allah IS.W.T4. Other Sufisthought it to be the knowledgeof sincerity between the

24 Al-Ghazzali, The Bookof Knowledge, p. 9.25 Al-GMzzaliyy, ihya’, Vol. I, p. 5.26 ibid., p. 7.

109

AL-GHAZZALIYY

followers of Allah [S.W.T.] and the followers of Satan.27Athird group of Sufis said that it was the esoteric sciencewhoseacquisitionis requiredonly ofthequalified,selectfew,who accordinglydid notacceptthe exotericmeaningoffard‘aynwhich would havemadeit imperativeuponeveryonetolearnthisparticularscience,28ThelastSufipositionwasthatof Abfl Talib Al-Makkiyy who understoodit in termsof whatlater on becameknown asthe five pillars of Islam.29

In principle, Al-GhazzãliyyacceptedAJ-Makkiyy’s viewbut he stressedthe ideathat thisfard ‘ayn iswhathe calledearlier ‘tim al-mu’ãmalah(the scienceof action). Moreover,while A1-Ghazzãliyy maintained the same notion as thebasis for his science of action, it must be said that hedeviseda timetable for the acquisition and application ofthe sciencethat Is fard ‘ayri taking Into considerationtheconditionssurroundingthepersonwho wason the path ofacquiringsuch knowledge.3°I found that his accountsinthis paragraphare copied almost ad verbum from Al-Makkiyy’s QUt aI-Qutüb.3’ In fact, onecanseetheInfluenceof this book on awide rangeof topicsin the Ihyâ’.

4.1.3 On the Division of the Sciences

In thesecondsectionof thebookof knowledge.Al-Ghazzãliyydivided knowledge into two sections; ‘ulüm shar’tyyah(sciencesof the Shari’ah) and the ghayr-shar’tyyah (non-Shari’ah) suchasmedicineandmathematics.According tohim, the latter sciencesarefard kzfdyah.Nevertheless,hecriticized unnecessarystudies in thesesciencessuch asthe branchesof mathematicsthat do not havepracticalapplications.As for the sciencesof the Shari’ah, he held

27 Ai-Ghazzaliyy. Ihya’. Voi. I, p. 14.28 Al-Ghazzafl, The BookofKnowledge,pp. 30—31.29 Theseare: bearingwitness that thereis no God but Allah and that

Muhammad is His prophet, prayer, regular alms giving, fastingthe month of Rmnadanand pilgrimage to the House of Abraham(A1-Ka’bah) in Makkah, Thesefive pillars werepart of a Hadith thatwas narrated on the authority of Ibn ‘Umar by both Al-Bukharlyyand Muslim, Thus, this Hadith is renderedrnuttafaq ‘atayh (agreeduponl which is the highestlevel of certitudeof a sound Hadith.

30 Al-Ghazzaliyy. ihya’. Vol. 1. p. 14.31 Abu Tahb Al-Makkiyy, Qut Al-Qulub (cairo: dar Sadir, 18923 pp.

129—130.

110

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OF SECLUSION

that they were concernedwith two subjects; the first per-tainsto life in this worldwhich is coveredby jurisprudence,and the secondaddressesissuesrelated to the hereafter.He describedthe secondasthe scienceof the statesof theheart(‘Elm czhwâlczl-qalb}which forms thesubjectmatterofthe Ihya’.32

Al-Ghazzaliyystatedthatjurisprudencecannotextendits jurisdiction to the affairs of theheart, andwhenevertheknowledge that leads to the hereafter Is compared withjurisprudence,the superiority of the former is evident.Hedivided thesciencethat leadsto the hereafterinto two parts:the scienceof unveiling33(‘tim al-mukashafah)andthe sci-enceof action (‘tim al-mu’&nalaN. Accordingto him, ‘tIm at-mukO.shafahis the scienceof esoteric knowledge (‘tim at-bath-i) which is theaim of all sciences.Furthermore, ‘Elm ci-mukashafahis the scienceconcernedwith those who arefavouredby Allah [S.W.T.I. It standsfor a light which shinesin theheartwhenit is cleansedandpurified of its blamewor-thy qualities(e.g.pride, the love of thisworld) which preventthe attainmentof suchlight. Al-Ghazzaliyyprovideda longlist ofthetruthsthat areattainedthroughthis light. Hesaid:

‘Throughthislight isrevealedthetruthofseveralthings.whosenameswereknown,andto which illusionswereattached.Throughit, thesetruthsareclarified until thetrue knowledgeof the essenceof Allah [S.W.T.I is at-tained togetherwith that of His eternal and perfectattributes,Hisworksandwisdomin thecreationof thisworld and the hereafteraswell as the reasonfor Hisexalting the latterover the former. Through it also isattainedtheknowledgeof themeaningof prophecyandprophet,andtheimportanceof revelation.Throughit isobtainedthe truth about Satan,the meaning of thewordsangelsanddevils, andthe causeof the enmitybetweenSatanandman.Through It is known how theAngel appearedto prophetsand how they receivedtheJdivinejrevelation.Throughit isachievedtheknowledgeof the kingdom of heavenand earth, as well as the

32 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’, Vol. 1, pp. 16—17,33 Revelation (kashJ) here meansunveiling knowledge that is usually

withheld from human beings.This concept is different from (wahy)which is restrictedto propheticrevelation.

111

AL-C HAZZALIYY

knowledgeof the heartandhow theangelichostshaveconfronted the devils. Through it is gainedthe know-ledge of how to distinguish between the company ofheavenandthe companyofthe Devil, aknowledgeof thehereafter, Paradise, and hell, the punishmentof thegrave, the bridge (aI-sts-dt) acrossthe infernal fire, thebalanceofthejudgementday,andknowledge (of theday)or reckoning.”34

Al-Ghazzãliyy argued that those who attain suchknowledge, in addition to others, take different positionsregardingtheir significance.Someconsiderall the kinds ofknowledgementionedaboveasmereexamples;othersholdthat some of thesekinds of knowledgeare mere patternswhile the rest of thesekinds are identical with the realitiesindicatedby their names.Othersholdthat thelimit to whichourknowledgeofAllah canreachis knowledgeofthe inabilityto know Him. In addition, thereare thosewho claim greatthingson thesubjectof knowing Allah LS.W,T.I while othersmaintain that we cannotgo beyondwhat all the commonpeople (at-‘awãm) havereached,namely, that Allah exists(mawjfid), that He is omniscientand omnipotent, that Hehearsand sees,and that He speaks.35I find it rather hardto believe that the latter position correspondsto that ofcommonpeoplesince the languageis clearlyAsh’arite.

Furthermore, Al-Ghazzãliyy explained ‘tim at-rrtukàshafahasthat sciencewherebythe veil is removedsothat thetruth regardingthesethings becomesasclearas ifit wereseenby the eye, leavingno room for anydoubt. Manwould be capableof such a thing had not “rust and rotresulting from the filth of this world accumulatedover thesurfaceof the mirror of his heart”.36He assertedthat thescienceof the road of the hereafter is the knowledgeofhow to cleanse the surface of this minor from the filththat preventsthe knowing of Allah, His attributes,and Hisworks. Such cleansingis possiblethrough desistingfromlust andemulatingthe prophetsin all their states.Thus, tothe extenttheheartis cleansedandmadeto facethe truth,to tIi-~tsameextent will it reflect His reality. To reachthis

34 Ai-Ghazzali, TheBookof Knowledge,pp. 46-47.35 Ibid., p. 48.35 ThiLi.

112

AL-GHAZZALIY’tS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: ThE YEARS OF SECLUSION

level of knowledge,one should go through discipline (riya-dali), learningand instruction. Thesesciencesare not re-corded in booksand are not discussedby the one who isblessedwith this grace except among his own circle ofintimates who along with him partake of them throughdiscoursesand secretcommunication.38Moreover, he be-lievedthat ‘him aI-mukäshafahisanoccultscience(‘jim khàfl~and that therewere referencesto it in a Hadith that wasjudgedby A1-’Iraqiyy to be da’~38

The secondpart, namely, the scienceof action (‘tim at-mu’ãmalah), is the scienceof the statesof the heart. Al-Ghazzaliyy provided two lists of states: the first is a list ofpraiseworthystatessuch asthat of sincerity (ai-tkh1th~),andthe secondis a list of blameworthy states as the fear ofpoverty. He statedthat theknowledgeof thesestates(i.e. ofmorals)comprisesthe wayto the hereafterwhich is a must(fard ‘ayn) for every one.He arguedthat suchknowledgeismore important than jurisprudencewhich he called theexoteriescience(‘tIm al-thhtr). To supporthis argument,hestatedthat the scholarsof fiqh, including A1-Shãfi’iyy andIbn Hanbal,usedto study the scienceof the hereafter(‘timal-àkhira.h) at the hands of the scholarsof esoteric know-ledge(‘uiamà’ai-bàtirt) whomhealsodescribedasthepeopleof the hearts,namely, theSufis.39

The relationship betweenthe studies of the Shari’ahand Sufism accordingto Al-Ghazzaliyycanbe understoodfrom anaccountof Al-JunaydandAl-Sari,40hisSufi teacher.Al-Junaydsaid:

“Onceuponatimemy teacherAl-Sari askedmesaying,“When you leave my place whose companydo youkeep?’I said,“Al-Muhãsibiyy’s.”Towhichhereplied,”Wellhaveyou chosen!Follow his learningandculture,butavoid hisaffectationin speechandhis refutationof thetheologians.’Upon leaving I overheardhim say, “MayAllah makeyou first ascholarof Hadithandthena SufiratherthanaSufi first andthena scholarof Hadlth”.”4’

37 Ai-Ghazzali, The Bookof Knowledge,pp. 48-49.38 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Thya’,Vol. I. p. 20.39 Ibid., p.21.40 Abu Hasanlbn Al-Mughallis Al-Saqatiyy (256A.I-1./870 AD.)41 A1-Ghazzali,TheBookof Knowledge,p.52.

113

AL-GHAZZALIYY

Al-Ghazzáliyy asserted that he who studies thescienceofhadithand the Shari’ahbeforeheturns to Sufismcomesoff well: he who takesto Sufism beforelearningtheShari’ah exposeshimself to danger.42This position can beinterpretedasan attemptby Al-Ghazzaliyyto weigh Sufismwith the balanceof theShari’ah. Apparently,his adherenceto suchcriterionwasnotwithout loopholes. lbn Al-Jawziyycritized him for breakingthe laws of jurisprudencemorethan onceto accommodateSufi doctrinesandactions.43

4.1.4 On the Intellect (A1-’Aql)

The seventhsection in the book of knowledgeis concernedwith theintellect (ai- ‘aql); itsnoblenature,its definition, andits division.Al-Ghazzàllyysaid that it is superfluousto showthenoble natureof the intellect becauseit is the sourceandfountainheadof knowledgeas well as its foundation. Hedescribedthe relationship betweenknowledgeand the in-tellect,usingaNeoplatonictheme,asthatbetweenlight andthe sun. He found sufficient evidencefor the nobility ofthe intellect in the fact that it is the meansof happinessin this world and the hereafter.In addition. he maintainedthat the nobility of the intellect is somethingknown byinstinct.44

Moreover. Al-Ghazzãliyy attempted to support hisargumentregarding the nobility of the intellect by citingversesfromtheQur’anandreportsfromtheSunnah,aswashis practice. The first of these is a verse that in literaltranslationreads“Allah is theLight (Nür) of the HeavensandEarth. His Light is like a nichein which thereis a lamp — thelamp encasedin glass - the glass, as it were, a glisteringstar”A5 He interpreted the word, light, as intellect so thatthe nobility of intellect was establishedby its likeness tothe divine light.

- In addition, he related a Hadith, which is consideredda‘~fthat the intellect was the first thing that was createdby Allah. This creation, however,proved to be problematic

42 A1-Ghazzali,TheBookofKnowledge,p. 52.43 lbn Al-Jawziyy, Talbis IbUs, p. 166.44 Al-Ohazzali, TheBookofKnowledge,p. 221.45 Ai-Qur’an, Sura aI-Nur 24:35.

114

AL-GI-IAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: ThEYEARS OF SECLUSION

in Al-Ghazzaliyy’s view. He questionedthe nature of theintellectaccordingto this Hadith. Becauseit is thefirst thingto be created,he held that the intellect must be either anaccident(‘aracjj or an essenceUawhañ.But how could anaccidentbe createdbeforebodies?Again, if it is anessence,how could it havepure existencewhich is spaceless(mmghayri ta~tayyuz)?46Al-Ghazzàliyydid notprovideananswerto thesequestionshere;he arguedthat the answerbelongsto the scienceof “unveffing” (‘tim aI-multhshafahj47Themeaningis that one has to follow the Sufi path in order toachievesuchknowledge.

Al-Ghazzãliyy provided answersto thesequestionsinFatsal ai-Tafriqah bayn at-Islam wa at-Zartdaqah(The De-cisive Marker between Islam and Disbelief) which waswritten at a later stage,thoughduring the sameperiod. Inthis book, A1-Ghazzaliyy held that the first creation (i.e.intellect, ‘aqfl cannot be an accident; he thought that itmust be an angle that is called intellect. Moreover, in alanguagethat reflectsA1-Fãrãbi’sinfluence, he arguedthatthis noun (i.e. intellect) is given to the angelbecauseit ishis essence(jawhar) to conceivehimself and other thingswithout the needof ateacher.48It is lamentablethat hehadto resortto this FãràbianideaIn order to solve a problemwhich resulted from his inappropriate knowledge of theHadith.

Another influence of Al-Fãrãbi can be seenin thefollowing argument. Al-Ghazzàliyy’s interpretationof thisQur’anic verse, namely, that light In “Allah is the light” isinterpreted as intellect which means that Allah is theintellect of the Heavenandthe Earth (i.e. theuniverse).Notonly is this a clear departurefrom the Sunnl approachtotheattributesof Allah (S.W.T.] and,thus, the interpretationof such verses,49if combined with the Hadith about the

46 ThIs ideais similar to Descartes’regardingthemind which ‘doesnotneed space nor is dependent on any material thing.’ Descartes,DiscourseontheMethodand theMeditations,JohnVeitch, tr. (Buffalo:PrometheusBooks, 1989),p.31.

47 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Ihya’, V01. I, p.63.

48 Al-Ghazzaliyy, “Faisal ol-Tafriqah Bayn al-Islam wa aI-Zandaqah’,Maj,nu’at Rasa’il aFlmarn al-Ghazzaliyy (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 19861.Vol. III, p. 125.

49 lbn Kathir relatedin his Tafsü-the interpretationof severalprominentscholarsfrom amongthefirst generation(aI-SalaJlof Muslims and the

115

AL-GHAZZALIYY

intellect being the first creation,becomesthat the Intellectcreatedanotherintellect.This idea,althoughreconstructed,is reminiscentofAl-Farãbi’s cosmologywhich is Neoplatoniein its essence.

In addition, Al-Ghazzàliyyheld that the term ‘intellect’is applied to severalthings; he found that thereare fourdistinct meanings to this term that are related to know-ledge.The first is the qualitywhich distinguishesman fromanimals and enableshim to understandthe theoreticalsciences(nazar4jyah),and to learnthe abstract(fikrmyyali)disciplines. He held that the intellect is an instinct where-by, as a natural disposition, some animalsare capableofgraspingthe theoreticalsciences,exceptthat Allah [S.W.T.J,asa matterof fact, imbuedman alonewith thesesciences.He addedthat“the relationshipof this instinct, (namely,theintellect), to the sciencesis similar to that of the eye tovision; while therelationshipof the Shari’ahto theintellect.in so far as it leadsto the unfolding of the sciences,is likethat of the light of the sunto seeing”.5°

The secondmeaningof intellect (‘aqi) is explainedinterms of its applicationto logical necessities.Al-Ghazzaliyymaintained that this kind of knowledge “is presentevenin theinfantwho discerns5’thepossibilityof possiblethings

(Jà’tzãt) and the impossibility of impossiblethings (musta-h],iat), such as the knowledgethat two Is greaterthan oneand that one individual cannotbe in two different placesatthe sametime”.52

In the third place the word intellect is applied toempirical knowledge.Al-Ghazzaliyy said that this know-

subsequentgeneration (ol-Khala,fl, including Ibn Abbas. Mujahid,AnasIbn Malik. Ubayy lbn Ka’b and al-sadi.Themeaningof theterm‘light” in this verserevolvesaroundthenotion of guidance(i.e. Allah istheguideofthe inhabitantsof theHeavensandEarth).See,IbnKathir,Tafsir (Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1988). Vol. III, p. 280.

50 Al-Ghazzali, TheBookofKnowledge.pp. 226-227.51 It shouldbe noted that at a later stagein Al-MunqkJ.h.Al-Ghazzaliyy

considered ‘discernment’ the second level in the epistemologicaldevelopmentof man; this level is higher than the sensiblesand ispossibleto children who are sevenyearsold. The knowledegeof the‘ja’izat” and the ‘mustahikit’ belongto a higher level, namely,that ofreason.SeeAi-Ghazzaliyy, Al’MunqirTh. p. 145.

52 Al-Ohazzali, The Bookof Knowledge,p. 227.

116

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THEYEARS OF SECLUSION

ledge “is acquired through experience, in the course ofevents”. To explain the relationship between empiricalknowledgeand the intellect he said that he who is taughtby experienceis calledintelligent (‘dqmi).53

In the fourth place the term intellect is used when“the power of the instinct developsto such an extent thatits possessorwill be able to tell what the endwill be, and.consequently, he will conquer and subdue his appetitewhich hankers for immediate pleasures”. Al-Ghazzãliyymaintainedthat this is anotherquality that distinguishesman from animals.54

Al-Ghazzãliyy concludedthat “these forms of know-ledge are inherentin the intellect by nature, and cometolight when some causewhich will bring them out takesplace”. According to him, this knowledge is latent in theinstinct and later appearsas if there is no external in-fluence,He illustrated this notionby comparingit to “waterin theearth: it appearsup on diggingandaccumulatesat thebottom of the well (in this process)”.55In addition, he citedverses in the Qur’an which indicate that every humanbeingis born with an inherentknowledgeof reality. He heldthat belief is instilled by nature in the human soul, butbecauseof passingtime, some people forgot all about it,othersforgot it for awhile, but finally rememberedit. More-over, hecited anothergroup of verseswhich include anin-vitation for recalling and rememberingthe understandingthat the human being was enduedwith. He stated that“there are two kinds of remembrance:the oneis to recall apicture which once existed in one’s mind but has sincedisappeared,while the otheris to recall a picturewhich isinherentin one’smind by nature (Jltrah)”. In addition, hearguedthat “these facts are evident to him who exerciseshis insight, but are abstruseto him who is given to blindimitation andconformism” 56

Al-Ghazzaliyy held that people differ in their intellec-tual capabilitiesonly in regardto the secondfield of know-

53 Al-Ghazzali, TheBookofKnowledge,p. 227.54 Ibid., p. 228.55 Ibid., pp. 229—230.56 Ibid., pp. 230—231.

117

AL-GHAZZALIYY

ledge, namely,knowing logical necessitiessuchaswhat ispossibleor impossible.As far asthe intellect is concerned,it follows a courseof developmentthat begins at the ageof discernment(tamyiz)and reachesits completion at ageforty.57 It might notbejustacoincidencethat hewasaboutforty yearsold himselfwhenhewrotethesewords. It is quitepossiblethat he believedthat he reachedthe prime of hisintellectualcapabilitiesasmanifestedin the Ihyã’.

4.1.5 On Dialectical Theology (‘Em al-KaIãm)

A1-Ghazzaliyy’s position regarding Kalãm and philosophyin the fhyã’ seemsto be stricter than any other book, eventhosethat werewritten lateron (i.e. Al-Munqmdh).For him,“whateverKalãmoffersbywayof usefulevidenceiscontainedin the Qur’an and the Sunnah;anything else is eitherre-prehensibleargumentationwhich, as will be seen, is aninnovation(bid~dh),ormerewranglingbydwelling ordlstinc-lions or amplification throughthearrayofdifferentopinions,most of which are drivel and nonsense’.Nevertheless,hestatedthat althoughKaIàmwould be consideredheresyatthe time of the prophet IS.A.A.S.1. circumstanceschangedand it becamefard ktfäyalt58

4.1.6 On Philosophy

Regardingphilosophy, Al-Ghazzaliyy held that it is not asciencein itself but comprisesfour parts: the first includesgeometry and arithmetic which are permissible, unlessthere is reason to fear that they might lead a person toblameworthy sciences.59He did not discussthe reasonsthat led him to take such a position, and thus I find nojustification for his position. Perhapshe was carried offby a fervour of Sufi attitude that renderedmany thingsirrelevant to the way of the hereafter. It should be noted

57 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Ihya’, Vol. I. p. 88.58 Al-Ohazzali, TheBookof Knowledge,p. 53.59 A!-Ghazzallyy, Ihya’, Vol. I, p. 22.

118

AL-GHAZZAL1YY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OFSECLUSION

that this remark is not normal for Al-Ghazzaliyy and doesnot reflect his genera)position regardingarithmetic, geo-metry and the exact sciencesandthe Shari’ah. Rather, hedescribedtheir relation in neutrallanguage.

The second part of philosophy is logic, which Al-Ghazzãliyy definedas the study of proofs, definitions andtheir conditions. He maintained that both are included inKalãrrt,60 Moreover,he cited a Hadith which indicatesthatthose who dealwith logic will be unable to perform gooddeeds.A1-’Iraqiyy held that this Hadith is fabricated andthat It has no origin (La asia lah) in the Sunnah.6’Such anarration is an indication that therewere peoplewho cir-culated fabricated Hadith in order to prove a point or todefenda position.This Hadith provedto be problematicforsomeonelike Al-Ghazzaliyy; his position towards logic inhis earlier and later works shows an acceptancethat isdifferent from theone in the Ihyã’.

The third part of philosophy Is metaphysicswhichAl-Ghazzãliyy regardedas the sciencethat addressestheexistence of Allah and his attributes. He held that thisscienceis also containedin Kalàm. He comparedthe po-sition of the philosopherswith respectto this sciencetothat of the Mu’tazilites who representedabranch of Kalàm.He describedthe contribution of the philosophersin thisfield either as blasphemousor Innovation. On the otherhand he describedthe contribution of the Mu’tazllltes asinvalid (bath).62 -

Physicsis the fourth partof philosophy,someparts ofwhich contradict the Sharl’ah, religion and truth, andare, therefore, folly. Theseare not sciencesand may beclassified as such. The other parts of physics are con-cerned with the different substances:their properties,transmutation, and change.Al’Ghazzãliyy compared thecontribution of the philosophersin physics to medicinebut failed to seeany practical application for this studyand thus declaredIt useless.63

In this classification,Al-Ghazzaliyyelevatedtheknow-

60 A1-Ghazzallyy,Ihya’, Vol. 1, p. 22.61 Ibid.,p.41.62 Ibid., p. 22.63 Ai-Ghazzali, The Bookof Knowledge,p.54.

119

AL-GHAZZALIYY

ledgeoftheesoteric(‘iimai-bãtin), which is thedomainof theSufi, to the highest possiblerank comparedto the othersciences.He intentionally restricted the importance androle of the jurists to this world and advisedmany of themto seekaprofessionthat wouldbenefit the Muslims insteadof wasting their time in studying minute details in juris-prudencethat areof no benefit. In addition,he underminedthe contribution of the dialectical theologiansanddeclaredKalamasaveil that preventsthe Muta.kallimfrom achievingperemptoryknowledgeSince they do not haverecourseto‘tim ai-mukäshafah.64If thiswas hisattitude towardsjuris-prudenceand Kaiàm, It should comeas no surprise thathis position towardsthe philosopherswasthat of rejection.It seemsthat Al-Ghazzãliyy was caughtat this stagewithan enthusiasmfor the Sufi pathwhich dwarfedthe impor-tanceof other sciences.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s aim in discussingknowledge at thebeginning of the Ihyã’ is to identify the sciencethat isrequired of everyone.Clearly, he is referring to a sciencethat is hidden and which cannot be attained throughsourcesof knowledgesuchasreason.He wantedtheseekerto realize that worldly affairs constitute a barrier thatpreventsone from achievingtheknowledgethat Sufis claimto have acquired, and, therefore, he needs to look withdisdain at worldly things. Al-Ghazzaliyy assertedthatattainment of this knowledge can be promotedby “self-mortification, discipline, and through purifying the heartby freeingit fromtheaffairs of thisworld, aswell asthroughemulating the prophetsandvery virtuous people(awityd’)sothat it may be revealedto every seekerin proportion towhatAllah [S.W.T.] hasallocated(rizq) for him, rather thanin proportion to the seeker’sefforts and labours(jahd). Yetdiligencein it is indispensablefor self-mortificationwhich isthe sole key to guidance”.65

Like all Sufis,Al-Ghazzaliyybelievedthat oneneedsaSufi guide to helppreparehim toreceivedivine illumination.Nevertheless, the Ihyä’ was intended as a manual that

64 A1-Ghazzaliyy,fhya, Vol. I, pp.22—23.65 Al-Ohazzali, TheBookof Knowledge.p. 100.

120

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OF SECLUSION

describeswhat the noviceneedsto achievesuchknowledge.He concluded the Book of Knowledge by defending theposition of the Sufis who wereaccusedof disparagingtheintellect andreasonaswell asthe rational andthe reason-able. He said that the reasonfor such accusationsis that“menhavetransformedthetermintellect or reason(aqi) andthetermrationalor reasonable(ma’cjüfl toindicateargumen-tationanddebateovercontradictionsandrequisites,thingsthat have to do with dialectical theolo~r(Kalàm). Conse-quentiy, the Sufis could not tell that men haveused thiseplstemolo~,In waysdifferent thantheoriginal meanings;ithasnotbeenpossibletoremovethatfrom theirmindsinviewof its current andwell-establishedusage.As a result, theydisparagedreasonand rationalism.”66The later positionofthe Sufis can beinterpretedasa reactionto whatmight bedescribedasawave of rationalismthat prevailedduring thegoldenageof Islamic civilization which is manifestedin thewritings of the philosophers, the Mutakallimürt and theMu’tazilah in addition to others.

4.1.7 On Creed(‘Aq~dah)

Al-Ghazzaliyy reiteratedhis position on the acquisition ofknowledgethroughoutthe ItyEf. In thechapteron Qawa’idal- ‘Aqã’id (The Fundamentalsof Belle!) he said that oneisnot required to do researchor to arrangeproofs in orderto achieveknowledge;the only thing that he hasto do is tofollow the path of the hereafterand to preoccupyhimselfwith discipline and self-mortification. Only then will “thedoors of guidanceopen and reveal the truths of this creedthrough divine light which strikes the hearts”. He addedthat this knowledgeis possiblebecausethere is averse intheQuran in which Allah promisesguidancefor thosewhostrive to act virtuosly.67 Therefore,he interpretedthe pos-sibility of knowledge through divine illumination as afulfillment of the latter promise.68

66 Ai-Ghazzali. TheBookofKnowledge,p. 235.67 Al-Quran, Surahal-Ankabut29:69.68 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Ihya’, Vol. 1, p. 94.

121

AL-GHAZZALIYY

4.1.8 On Dreams

In the chapter on the reality of poverty and mysticism(zuhd) whereheadvocatedthat intentional poverty is acon-dillon that enablesthe ascetic,who embracespoverty (al-faqir aI-zãhid),69 to know things that are notpermitted forthose who are preoccupiedwith money whether rich orpoor. One of the most important issueshere is that headopteddreamsasanothersourceof knowledge.He relateda Hadith of the prophet iS.A.A.S.I in which he said, ‘Truevision is a part of forty six partsof prophecy”.7°He com-mentedon this ratio andsaid thatIt is notpossibleto knowthereasonbehindit; heheldthatanyattemptto dosowill benothing more than guessing.7’In anothersection iii theIhya’, he discussedother conditions that pertain to suchvision (e.g.purification). In this section,A1-Ghazzaliyymain-tained that he could only talk aboutthe natureof dreamsthroughthe useof examplesbecausethis subjectbelongsto‘ulurn al-mukdshafahwhich shouldnotbe discussed.72

It seemsthatAl-Ghazzaliyy’sposition onthepossibilityof attaining peremptory knowledge through dreams issubstanstiatedby soundtraditions, which is not the casewith thoseon poverty. His argumentsregardingpovertyarefilled with traditionsthat are “weak” andseveralothersthatare fabricated(niawdfl’). I think that hefailedto cite sourcesin the Sharl’ahto supporthispositionregardingintentionalpoverty. In addition, Ibn A1-Jawziyy criticized him foradopting this position which he consideredcontradictoryto both the Sharl’ah and reason.73Thus, if Intentionalpoverty, which is supposedto be an action that brings one

69 Thetennfaqir(poor)wasusedasasynonymfor Sufl~In Suft literature.70 This Hadith,~AI-Ru’ya ol-salthahjuz’ mm s(ttahwa’arba’tnJuz’ ruin al-

nubuwwah”, wasrelatedby Al-Hukhariyy from thenarrationof AbuSaid.Thereisanotherversionof this Hadith in which theprophetsays,“The vision of the believeris apartof forty six partsof theprophecy.This latter versionwas relatedby both Al-Bukharlyy andMuslim intheircollectionsofSahihfromthenarrationsofAbu Hurayrah.‘UbadahIbn A1-Samlt and Anas Ibn Malik. It Is apparentthat this Hadithis ranked rnuttafaq’ atayh, the highest rank amongthe narrationsthat areconsideredcorrect

71 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Thya’,vol. iv, p. 19472 Ibid., p. 504.73 lbn A1-Jawziyy. Talbis, pp. 176-178.

122

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE:ThE YEARS OF SECLUSION

closerto the possibility of acquiringperemptoryknowledge,is against the Shari’ah, how could someoneclaim that hehas a truevision?

4.1,9 Conclusion

A1-Ghazzãliyy had to rethink his position regarding allfields of knowledgeupon his acceptanceof the Sufi path asthe only way that leads to the attainmentof peremptoryknowledge. He used this Sufi knowledgeas the criterionto be usedwhen consideringthe various subjectsthat heused; the variety of thesesubjectsmade it rather difficultto reconcile all of them within the framework of hisepistemology.

Al-Ghazzaliyy held that there existsa faculty higherthan reasonin which knowledgeis “unveiled” to the Sufi.Through this faculty one can achieveknowledge directlyfrom divine sources.He did not discussthe natureof thisknowledge,claiming that hehad no permissionto revealit,andthatlanguageis notsuitableto expresssuchexperience.Yet, in order to qualil~,for this divine knowledge,oneshouldlead a disciplined and an immaterial life leading to self-mortification. The Ihy&’ is written primarily asa guide thatcontains the scienceof action which is a prerequisitetothe attainmentof divine knowledge.

The positions Al-Ghazzaliyy took in the Ihyã’ showthat hewascarriedawayby Sufism.His positionsregardingmany subjects(e.g., logic, kalàni) contain flaws. In somecases in his later works, these flaws were overcome bycorrectedarguments.

4.2 AL-MAQSADAL-ASNAFl SHAWlASMA’ALLAHAL-HUSNA

Thewritings that followed the Ihyä’ continuedto reflect Al-Ghazzaliyy’sposition towardsreasonandothersourcesofknowledge. In the introduction of A1-Maqsczdal-AsnafiSharhAsmã’Allah A1-Husrjã (The Sublime Aim in the In-terpretation of Allah’s Beautiful Names) he emphasizedthe inability of reasonto attain transcendentalknowledge,

123

AL-GHAZZALIYY

namely,knowledgeof Allah andthe reality of hisattributes.He addedthat suchknowledge,which he acquiredthrough“unveiling” (mukàshafah),does not conform to the ideas.on this subject, that werepresentedby the scholarsbeforehim. He knew that it is rather a difficult task to changethecustomsand beliefs that peopleare accustomedto. Never-theless,hebelievedthat whoeverhas “seen” the Truth andknows Allah, cannotbut conveysuchknowledge.74

4.3 BIDAYAT s.L-fflDAYAU

In Btdayat al-Hidàyah (The Beginning of Guidance), Al-Ghazzaliyywrote a chapteron the gradualintroduction ofguidance. The introduction of this chapter75is an exactrepetition of a similar text in his Qawa’id al- ‘Aqa’id whichstressesdisciplineandself-mortificationasprerequisitesforthe attainmentof peremptoryknowledge.This introductionis anotherproof of the consistencyduring this period re-gardingthe methodor the “path” that A1-Ghazzaliyyadvo-catedfor the attainmentof knowledge,

4.4 JAWAHIR AL-QUR‘AN

In another book, Jawàhir aI-Qur’ãn (The Jewels of theQur’an), Al-Ghazzaliyyassertedthe position that onecouldhavea true vision, asa sourceof knowledge,while asleep.He argued, similar to his position in the Ihya’, that thisform of knowledge is the equivalentof one forty-sixth ofprophecy.76Moreover,heheldthatsuchknowledgeisalwaysrevealedin metaphorical languagethat representstrans-cendentalknowledge.Sincenoteveryoneknowsthemeaningof thesemetaphorsonlythosewho possessknowledgeof thehidden relationship betweenthis world and the other one

74 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Maqsad a(-Asna Sharh Asma’ Allah Al-Husrta,MuhammadMustafaAbuAl-’UIa, ed. (Cairo: Maktabatal-Jlndi, 1968)pp. 5-6.

75 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Bidayat al-Hidayah.MuhammadAl-Hajjar,ed.(Damas-cus: dar al-Sabuni, 1986), pp. 27—29.

76 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Jawahfr al-Qur’au, MuhammadMustafa Abu A1-’Ula,ed.(Cairo: Maktabatal-.Jindi, 19641p. 31.

124

AL-Gl-IAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARSOF SECLUSION

can interpret them. Onceagain, he assertedthat to unveilthesecretsof theother world oneshouldresortto disciplineand self-mortification.77

In anothersectionin JawaM- al-Qur’àn, Al-Ghazzaliyypointed to insight (basirab) as a source of knowledge. Hesaid, “It appearedto me through clear insight andbeyonddoubt, that man is capableof acquiring several sciencesthat arestill latent andnotexistent.“78 The meaningof thisstatementis that he perceivedsciencesother than thoseexisting at the time. Thesesciencesare latent,yet they arewithin reach of human beings. Though the concept oflatentscienceswhich arenotdiscoveredyet is anintersetingideain itself, the emphasishereis on his useof Insight asasourceof knowledgewhich is consistentwith his positionin the Ihy&’.79

Thereis yet anotherbookofconsiderableimportancetothe problem of knowledge, namely,At-Qistásal-Mustaqim(TheJust Balance).Althoughthis book couldbeconsideredprimarily as polemic against the Batinites, A.l-Ghazzaliyyalso showshis ability to criticize the argumentscommonlyusedin Kalàmandjurisprudence.In the courseof pursuingthis critique, he presentsstrong argumentson the role ofreasonin Islam and definesthe limits of personalopinion(ray) andanalogy(qiyas). 80

In his argumentagainstopinion, A1-Ghazzaliyypro-vided an examplefrom the doctrinesof the Mu’tazilites Inwhich they argued that, “Allah is obliged to order thebest for His servants”. He said that If they are askedtoestablish this, they have recourseonly to opinion thatthey judge to be good by means of their intellects byanalogy between the Creator and His creation and bylikening His wisdom to theirs.A1-Ghazzaliyyassessedtheiropinion and found it to be false according to the rule ofconcomitance (mizärt al-talazum) which he derived fromthe Qur’an, saying:

77 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Jawahir, pp. 33-34.78 Ibid., p. 28.79 Ai-Ghazzall, TheBookofKnowledge,p.231.80 D.P. Brewster,trans.anded.,Al-Qistasal-Mustaqim,byAl-Ghazzaliyy

(Lahore:Sb. MuhammadAshraf, 1978). p. oc.

125

PLL-GHAZZLIYY

“If the best was obligatory for Allah, He would havedoneit.It is known that Hehasnotdone it.This demonstratesthat it is not obligatory, For Hedoesnotneglectthatwhich is obligatory.”81

He addedthat if the Mu’tazilites do not admit that“Allah hasnot doneit”. he would reply that if He haddonethat which was bestHe would havecreatedthem in Para-dise and would have left them there.82One of the mostimportantaspectsthat canbederivedfrom sucharguments,is Ai-Ghazzaliyy’s ability to paint Aristotelian logic withIslamic color.

In his criticism of analogy Al-Ghazzáliyy used anexamplefrom the Mujassimahwho believethatAllah hasabody. They said, “He (Allah) is an agent and an artisanand by analogywith other agentsandartisans(who havebodies).He hasa body”. Al-Ghazzãliyyconsideredthis ana-logy false. He held that it is calledthe GreatRule (al-rruzàna(-akbar) and that it runs like this:

“Every agenthasa body.The Creatoris an agent.

HenceHehasabody.’

According to him, the problem in this analogy is notwith the secondpremisewhich heaccepted;it is thevalidityof the first premise that he questioned.He said that theMujassimah derived the first premise from two sources:induction (istiqrd5 and the extendedcategories(aL-qismaha(-muntashirah). He stated that induction, in this ease,consistsof examining all the classesof agents(e.g., theshoemaker,the tailor, the carpenter)and finding that theyall havebodies.Al-Ghazzãliyy found this generalizationtobe incomplete, since they did not examine every agentincluding Allah [S.W.T.J In addition, he assertedthat in-duction cannotprovidea certainconclusion.83

With regard to the use of extended categories, Al-

81 A1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Qistas,pp. 97-98.82 IbId., p. 98.83 IbId., pp. 101—102.

126

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OFSECLUSION

Ghazzaliyy provided an examplewhere one of the Mujas-simahsays:

“I haveexaminedthe attributes of agentsand foundthem to possessbodies.This is becauseof their exist-enceas agentsor. alternatively, becauseof their veryexistence,or for someotherreason.”84

Thenhe setsasideall categories(aqsàm)85andstatesthat they possessbodies becauseof their existence asagents.Al-Ghazzâliyydescribedthispositionasanextendedcategory and consideredit to form a false analogy. It isbased on the method of induction, which Al-Ghazzallyypreviouslycriticized, becausein theexample.it beginswitha premisethat is derived from examining the attributes ofagentsandfinding themto possessbodies.It thensetsasideall categories(aqsam)andstatesthat they possessbodiesbecauseof their existenceas agents.Therefore,I find theposition of assigninga special categoryfor the extendedcategoryis rather ambiguous.86 -

The spirit ofAl-Qistasal-MustaqimandA1-Ghazzaliyy’sstance on the syllogism prompted Brewster to comparehim to BernardLonergan:

‘The function of the syllogistic expressionis not toeliminatebut to facilitatethe occurenceof thereflectiveact of understanding....Inversely,when a man pro-nouncesajudgementon thevalueof decidingtobelieve,it is notbecauseof a syllogismbut only becausethesyllogismhasto graspthevirtuallyunconditionedinhisacceptanceof thepremises.”87

84 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Qistas. p. 103.85 Dan al-Kutub aI-’llmlyyah publishedanArabic edition of Al-Qistasa!-

Mustaqimin whichtheword aqsam(categories)wassubstituted withajsam (bodies).I find Brewster’stranslationto bemoreaccuratefor tworeasons.First, it doesnotmakesenseto ‘setasideall bodiesandto statethat theypossessbodies.”Thesecondreasonis that Brewstercitedthesource(i.e. Chelhot’s printed text of 1959, whIch was basedon theprinted text of Cairo, 1900, revised accordingto the readingsof themanuscriptsoftheEuscurlalandKastamonudated544 A.H.) that heusedfor his translation,while theArabic edition doesnot cite anymanuscriptsand thus resemblesthe many uncritical editions thatflood themarket.SeeBrewster,Introduction,Al-Qistasal-MustaqimbyA1-Ghazzaliyy,p. nii.

86 Al-Ghazzaiiyy, Al-Qistas,p. 103.87 Brewster.Appendix Ill, Al-Qistas, by A1-Ghazzaliyy.p. 124.

127

AL-GHAZZALIYY

HeconcludedA1-Qistasby assertinghispositionregard-ing the relationshipbetweenreasonandrevelation.He saidthat what is intelligible (al-mn’qul) should be measuredagainstthatwhich is transmitted(aI-rnanqül, i.e. the Qur’anand the Sunnah).This statementis a clear indication ofthe supremacyof the Shari’ah over reason in the eyesofA1-Ghazzáliyy.88

4.5 AL-RISALAHAL-LADUNIV’IYYA71

In A1-Risàlahal-Lathrnniyyak,89Al-Ghazzãliyy appearedtobedefending“metaphysicaltranscendentalknowledge(at’fImal-ghaybiyyal-ladünniyy)uponwhich elite Sufisdepend(forknowledge)”. In terms of certitude,he ranked this kind ofknowledge higher than that which Is acquired throughconventionaleducation.90Thispositionwasbaseduponthesource of knowledge (i.e., Allah) and not its mode (e.g.rational vs. Shar’iyy). Regardingthe relationship betweenthe rational sciencesand those of the Sharl’ah, he statedthat he who really knows both fields fInds that the dis-tinction that divides them into two fields disappearsinmany cases.He consideredmany rational sciencesto bepart of the Shari’ah and many of the sciencesin the fieldof the Sharl’ahto be part of therational sciences.91

Nevertheless,he held that all sciencesare importantbecausescienceindicatesthe existenceof knowledge.andignorance is the absenceof it. Moreover, he maintainedthat knowledgecorrespondsto the soul and ignorancetothe body. He said that bodiesare finite andnot equippedto

88 Al-Ghazzailyy, At-Qistas,p. 111.89 Literally, Ladunmeans“at theplaceorhandsor. In thetitie of this and

everySufi treatiseIt is usedin relation to a versementionedIn theQur’an (18:65)themeaningofwhich is: “So they(prophetMosesandhisattendantjfoundoneofOurservants,onwhomWehadbestowedmercyfrom Ourselvesand whom we hadtaught knowledge from Our oivnpresence(tadunnc4.Thus, Sufis are striving to acquirethis kind ofknowledgewhich A1-Ghazzaliyycallsal-thu al-ghayblyyal-tadunn4jy.directly fromAllah. It Isapparentthat anaccurateconcisetranslationisnot possible.For atranslationofthemeaningof thisparticularverseIn the Qur’an. seeAbdullah Yusuf All’s Ma’ani ai-Qur’an at-Karim(Lahore:Sheikh MuhammadMhraf, 1934).

90 Al-Ghazzaliyy, ‘Al-Risakthat-L.adwrniyyah”.Mqjrnu’at Rasa’ttaI-ErnarnAt-Chazzaligy.(Beirut: DarAl-Kutub al-’llmiyyah, 1986),Vol.111, p. 87,

91 A1-Ghazzaltyy,AL-Rlsalahat-Ladunalyyah,p.96.

128

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OF SECLUSION

hold the many sciencesunlike the soul which acceptsallknowledgewithout any obstacle.92

Al-Ghazzaliyy elaboratedon the sourcesof humanknowledge which he limited to two: human and divine(rabbanfl. He consideredthe first asaknown path which allintelligentpeopleaccept.Knowledgein this sourceis achievedin two ways: fromwithoutwhich is formallearning,andfromwithin which is thinking. He held that knowledgeexists inpotentiality inside the souls and defined learning as theprocesswhich brings knowledgeout of potentiality intoactuality.To explainhis ideahe usedan analogy,writing:

‘~Thesciencesareconcentratedin thesoulsin potential-ity, similar to theseedsin earth... . Learningis seekingto bring out that thing from potentiality to actuality,while teaching is bringing it out, The learner’ssoulimitates that of the teacherand tries to get closeto itbecausethe scholaris similar to the peasantin bene-fiting others,and thelearneris similar to the earth ingainingbenefit.Thesciencein potentialityis similar tothe seed,while in actuality is the plant. Once thelearner’s soul is perfected (through education) it be-comessimilar to a fruitful tree.”93

Moreover,oncethebasicsofanysciencearelearned,thesoulusesintuition (hads)to reachthatwhich is required.Atthis stageaninsight brings out theknowledgethat existsinhis soul from potentiality to actuality.94The ideathat whatis in potentiality comes to actuality by some agency. isAristotelian.Aristotle said,“For from thepotentiallyexistingthe actually existing is always produced by an actuallyexisting thing, e.g. man from man”. In addition, two wordsthat Al-Ghazzãliyyusedin his analogy,namely, “seed” and“earth” were usedby Aristotle in his analogy in the Meta-physicswhich correspondsto the same notion.95 Thesesimilarities indicate the possibility that A1-Ghazzàliyywasawareof this particular conceptin Aristotle’s Metaphysics.

92 A1-Ghazzaliyy,AI-Risatahat-Lo.dunniyyah,p. 90.93 Ibid., p. 102.94 Ibid., p. 103.95 ArIstotle, “Metaphysics”, TheBasicWorksofAristotte,RichardMcKeon.

ed.(NewYork: RandomI-laouse,1941)1049al —1049b35/pp.827—829.

129

AL-GHAZZALiYY

The secondsourceof knowledge (i.e. divine) was alsodivided into two kinds: revelation (wahy) and inspiration(itham). Concerningrevelation,Al-Ghazzãliyy believedthatit is restricted to prophetsand that it is no longer availableafter the deathof prophetMuhammadjS.A.A.S.] Regardinginspiration, he statedthat unlike revelationwhere know-ledge is presentedin clear terms, inspiration constituteshintsofthesamekindof knowledgewhichiscalledprophetic(rtabawiyy) in the first case and laditnni in the second.Anothermajordifferencebetweenthesetwo forms of know-ledge is that revelation is known through Allah [S.W.T.J,while inspiration is known through the emanationof theuniversal intellect (at- ‘aqi al-kulliyy). Al-Ghazzãliyy heldthat the tadhrtrtiyy knowledgeIs a condition for the attain-mentof wisdom which is sufficient; onedoesnot haveto gothrough formal educationin order to achieveknowledge.96This latter position, which was commonamong the Sufis,wascriticized by Ibn Al-Jawzlyy.97Moreover,in Ayyuhàat-Watad (0 Child). Al-Ghazzaliyyconsideredlearningor read-ing subjectssuchaspoetry, Katàrn,grammerandmedicine,unless it is donefor the sakeof Allah [S.W.T.], a waste oftime that will be regretted.98

4.6 MISHICATAL-ANWAR

Al-Ghazzãliyywrote Mishkàtal-Anwàr(TheNichefor Lights)towards the end of this period of seclusion.The Mtshkahwaswritten asa reply to someonewho askedhim to disse-minate the secretsof divine Illumination, along with theinterpretationof the versesof light (e.g.Allah is the light ofHeavenandEarth).His answerto this requestwasthatsuchknowledge is restricted to the few. In addition, he relatedthe position of some Sufls who held that disclosing thedivine secretIs blasphemous(Ifstth’ sir al-rubitbiyyahkufd.Nevertheless,he was willing to reveal some of this know-ledge metaphoricallythrough hints, signs and symbols.

96 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Ai-RIsaiah aI-Ladunnlyyo.h,pp. 105-107.97 Ibn Al-Jawziyy, Talbis. p. 150.98 Al-Ghazzaiiyy, “Ayyuha al-Walad”, MaJmu’at Rasa’il at-Imam Al-

Ghazzaliyy. (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’llnliyvah. 1986). Vol. III, pp.154—I55.

130

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OFSECLUSION

Moreover, he held that it is in Allah’s hands to allow thehearts to understandthe meaningof these metaphors.99The latter idea indicatesthat he consideredthe heart (at-qaib), which he distinguishesfrom the physical one, as asourceof knowledge.Accordingto him, the hearthasan“eye”for knowledgewhich is sometimesreferred to as intellect,soulandhumanspirit. He definedit asthat “which differen-tiates the intelligent (humanbeing)from the nursinginfant,the animal andthe insane”.100

Al-Ghazzãliyy argued that the intellect moves frombeing insightful in potentiality (hi al-quwwah) to that ofactuality (hi at-JiM whenthelight of wisdomshines.It is thiskind of illumination that allows the “eye” of the heart toperceivethe realitiesof theotherworld ( ‘atarit aI-malakut) ina fashion analogousto the function of the physical eye inthe sensibleworld (‘alam al-shahâdal4.Hewentasfar astodescribethosewho settlefor knowledgeof the latterworld asmerelybeasts(bahlmah).10’

In relation to this neotic illumination, Al-Ghazzaliyydistinguish five levels of spirits with each correspondingto a level of knowledge.The first of theseis the sensiblespirit (al-rüh aL-hassas)which is responsiblefor receivingwhatevercomesthrough the five senses.This spirit is pos-siblefor both animals andInfants. The secondspirit is theimaginative (al-rfitt at-khayaliyy) which is responsible forstoring the sensiblesandpresentingthem to the intellectwheneverthere is need. He maintained that this one ispossible for children and some animals. An example ofthisis adogwhich Ishitwith astick, it runsawayuponseeingthe samestick again. This is an example of conditionedlearning,the subjectof which Is sensibleobjects.Thethirdis theintellectualspirit (al-rühat- ‘aqliyy) with whichsubjectsother than the sensibles and imagination are perceived[e.g., generalizations).This spirit is the essenceof adulthumanbeings; It Is not possiblefor children or animals.neitherany otherlevelbeyondthis one.Thefourth oneis the

99 Al-Ghazzaliyy.Mishkatal-Anwar, ‘AbdAl-’Aziz ‘Izz al-DinAl-Slyarawan,ed. (Beirut: ‘Alam al-Kutub, 1986), pp. 115—i 18.

100 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Mlshkaii. p. 122.101 Ibid., pp. 129—131.

131

AL-GHAZZALIYY

thinking spirit (at-rUh aI-Jikriyy) which is responsibleforgeneratingknowledgefrom pure intellectual sciences.Thefifth istheholypropheticspirit (at-ru! at-qudsiyyat-nabawiyy)which is restricted to prophets and some pious people(awtiyã’). Al-Ghazzaliyyarguedthat it is through this spiritthat divine knowledge is acquired. Most importantly, heheld that the lower levels (e.g. intellectual)arenotequippedto attain suchknowledge.’°2

Towardsthe end of the Mithkah, he addressedthosewho soughtretreatin the world of reason.He arguedthatthepossibility of havingafaculty higherthanthat of reasonis similar to the possibility of reasonbeing a faculty higherthanthe levelof discernmentand senses.103Themeaningofthis is that reasondoes exist regardlesswhether someonedoesnot possessit (I.e. his/her facultiesare on the level ofthesenseor discernment);by thesametoken,anoeticfacultywhich is higherthan reason(i.e. prophetic) also exists.

In addition, he believedthat through thefacultywhichrankshigherthanreason,elite Sufisarecapableof acquiringultimate knowledgefrom the samesourceasthe prophets,and therefore,they do notneedassistancefrom them.104

As a devoutSufi, Al-Ghazzaliyy concludedMishkàtat-Ariwãr, by aninvitation to strive for divine knowledgewhichcouldonly be hamperedby wavesof lust andworldliness.’05As a matter of fact, his last surviving book to be writtenduring this period, namely.A1-Kashfwaat-Tabylrtfi Ghururat-KhalqAjma‘In (Unveiling andExplanationof theDeceptionof all Creation),was an attempt to detail the areaswherepeopleneedto changetheir worldly behavior.106In addition,when he brought his seclusionto an end by returning topublic teaching,the declaredmotives indicate that It wasconsistent with the principles that led him to abandonpublic teachingin thefirst place:heassertedthatbothwerefor the sakeof Allah [S.W.T.J

102 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mishkah,pp. 165—166.103 Ibid., pp. 166—167.104 Ibid., pp. 170—171.105 Ibid., pp. 172—173.106 SeeA1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Kashfwa al-Tabyircfi Ghurural-KhalqAjma’in

(Cairo: Matba’atMustafaMuhammad,No Date).This book isprintedinthemarginof Tanbihal-Mughtan-inby ‘AbdAl-wahhabA1-sha’ramn~.

132

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUE~FOR KNOWLEDGE: THE YEARS OFSECLUSION

4.7 CONCLUSION

A1-Ghazzãliyyemphasizedin his writings the limited capa-bility of reasonand that “unveiling” (kashj) is the onlysourceof knowledgethat is absolutelycapableof attainingindubitable transcendentalknowledge. In the I!iyã’ ‘iliumat-Din (The Revival of Islamic Sciences),he stressedthesuperiority of Sufi knowledgeoverthat which is attainedbyconventional sourcesof knowledge. This Sufi knowledgewhich he referred to as ‘Urn at-mukáshafahis the aim ofintellectual activity, yet he stated that such knowledgeshouldnotbe revealedto the public.Therefore,the subjectof the Ihyã’ is that knowledgewhich leads to “unveiling”(ka.shJ),namelythescienceof action(‘itm at-mu’arnalah).Byaction, he means self-mortification and discipline whichform a prerequisite for attaining peremptory transcen-dental knowledge. In addition, he held that “unveiling”(kashJ) is possiblethrough the faculty higher than reason.Theaim of this position is to showthe limitations of reasonwhich cannotachieveperemptoryknowledge.This positionis reinforced by listing prophecy as the highest level inrelation to the attainmentof knowledgewhich is followedby the scholars in what might be consideredAl-Ghaz-zãllyy’s responseto the Muslim philosopherswho rankedreasonasthe highestfaculty. Finally, he addedin the Ihyà’another form for the attainment of peremptory know-ledge,namely,vision.

Similar to his position In the Ihya’, Al-Ghazzãliyycon-tinued in At-Maqsadal-Asrta SharhAsmã’Allah At-Husnã(TheSublimeAim in the Interpretationof Allah’s BeautifulNames)to stressthe limitations of reasonand its Incapa-bility to attain peremptorytranscendentalknowledge.Theonly way to achievesuch knowledgeis through “unveiling”(kashJ).It is obviousthat thesetwo notions are consistentwith Al-Ghazzäliyy’s epistemologyin the Ihyâ’.

As to Bidãyat al-Hidãyah(TheBeginningof Guidance),therearewholesectionswhich areidenticalwith Qawà’ictat-‘Aqà’id which is considereda partof the Ihyã’ andthereforeit adds to the consistencyof Al-Ghazzàliyy’s epistemology

133

AL-GHAZZALIYY

during this period. In thesesectionshe assertedthe notionof discipline and self-mortification as prerequisitesto theattainmentof peremptoryknowledge.

In Jawähir at-Qur’än (TheJewelsof the Qur’an) whichcorrespondsto his position in the Ihyã’ and Bidàyat At-Hidayak Al-Ghazzãliyymaintainedthe notion of disciplineand self-mortification as conditions for the attainment oftranscendentalknowledge. He held that transcendentalknowledge can be revealed through true vision in meta-phorical language,

In At-Risãtahat-Lo.dLtnrtiyyah,Al-Ghazzaliyydiscussedthe notion of “metaphysicaltranscendentalknowledge” (at-‘Urn al-ghaybiyy at-ladünniyy)which is acccessibleto eliteSufis only. This kind of knowledgecanbe attainedthroughinspiration(ithãm).

The last book dealing with the epistemologyof Al-Ghazzãliyy during the first period of seclusionis Mishkatat-Anwãr (TheNiche for Lights). He reiteratedhis positionregarding the existenceof a faculty higher than reason.According to him, elite Sufis arecapableof attainingknow-ledgedirectly from the samesource,similar to prophets.

Although Al-Ghazzàliyy introduces different sources(e.g., inspiration, insight) for the attainmentof knowledge,these six booksemphasizeSufism as the common themeand, therefore, this period of seclusion reflects a unifiedepistemology.

134

Chapter FIVE

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE SECOND PERIOD OF PUBLIC TEACHING(499-503A.H./1106-1110 C.E.)

This chapter deals with Al-Ghazzállyy’s writings duringthe secondperiod of public teachingat the NizãmiyyahofNishapurwhich lastedfor about four years.After spendingmorethan a decadein seclusion,he realizedthat therewasnothing that could justify his withdrawal from public life,especiallywhen he could seethat the society at largewasastraying from the straight path, and was, therefore, indesperateneedfor reformation,He knewthat byattemptingto play the role of a reformer, he would win the animosityof many peopleif not all. Nevertheless,realizing that thisreturn to public life was taking place at the turn of thesixth centuryA.H. (Dhu al-Q1’dah, 499 A.H.), he was con-vinced that he was going to be the expected reformer(rnujaddicl) in accordancewith a Hadith of the Prophet[S.A.A.S.] In which he said that Allah [S.W.T.l will send areformerto the Muslim nation (ummal-i) at the turn of eachcentury to revive its religion.’ Al-Ghazzaliyy’s decision toleavehisseclusionwasmadeinconsultationwith prominentSufis; it was alsosupported,he argued,by manyvisions ofgoodpeople.2In addition,hereceivedanofficial requestfromvizier Fakhral-Mulk in which he askedhim to teachat theNlzkmiyyah of Nishapur.3

1 This Hadith (lana Altaha Ta‘ala yab‘athu Ithadhihi al-ummah ala ra’sikulti nd’ati sanatin man yuJaddldu taM dinahc4 was verified by AbuDawud, A1-I-Iaklm and Ai-Bayhaqiyy. SeeA1-Ghazzaliyy. A1-Munqldh,p. 159.

2 A]-Ghazzallyy,At-Munqldh, p. 159.3 A1-Qarah Daghi, Vol. I, p. 123.

135

AL-GHAZZALIYY

During theseyears. he wrote four books4: his auto-biographicwork at-Munqidh rntn aI-Datàt (DeliverancefromError), a ruling (fatwã) on divorce Ghayat al-Ghawr ftDirayat at-Dawr, at-Mu.stasfamm ‘Itrn at-Usut (The Chosenfrom the Scienceof the Fundamentalsof Jurisprudence),andadefenceof theIhyà’which he calledat-IrnIa’filshkã! atat-Ihyã’ (TheDictation on the Problemsof the Revival).5It isthe aim of this chapterto continue tracingAl-Ghazzaliyy’stheory of knowledge In thesebookswith the exceptionofGhayãt aI-Ghawr ft DirUyat aI-Dawr which is not relatedto the subjectmatterof this chapter.

5.1 AL-MIJNQIDHMIN AL-DAL~4L

The first book to bewritten during this periodIs al-Munqfd.hrntn al-DatEd (The Deliverancefrom Error). This book waswritten in responseto a brother in religion who wantedA1-Ghazzallyyto communicateto him “the aim andsecretsof the scienceand the dangerousand intricate depthsofthe different doctrinesand views”.6 It is not now possibleto determinewhether this requestactually took place; itis likely that this question-answeris nothing but thewriting style of Al-Ghazzallyy. It Is possiblethat he pickedup this style from Platonicdialogues.7

Al-Ghazzaliyy gave an account of his “trail in dis-engagingthetruth from amid thewelterof thesects,despitethe polarity of their meansand methods”.In addition, hediscussedwhy and how he moved from conformism toindependentinvestigation.8 He next deliberately took the

4 Bouyges listed two other books, the first is Aja’ib al-Khawas (Thewonders of the Qualities tof chemicalsand MaglcD: theauthenticityof this book was disputed by many scholars.The secondbook is Sirat-’Alamyn wakashfrnafi al-Darayn (The Secretof theTwo worlds): theauthenticity of this book was disputed by many scholars includingBouygeshimself. See Badawi, Mu’allafaA p. 205 and p. 271.

5 Badawi,Mu’allafat, p. xvii.6 Al-Ghazali, Freedom and Fldjillment, p. 61.7 In addition to At-Munqidh nUn al-Dalal, examplesof this style can be

found in Al-MaqsodaI-AsnaSharhAsma’Allah Al-Husno, At-Qistas al-Mustaqim, aI-Rtsalah al-Ladunnlyyah, FaLsaI al-Tafriqah. and Ayyuhaal-Walad.

S A1-Ghazzaliyy, Freedomand FUlfill meat, p. 61.

136

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE..

readeron an intelectuai tour that has Sufism as the laststation. This stationwas not intendedasa layover, wherethe readerwould take a rest before returning to his firststation; At-Murzqmdhwas designedto take the readeron aone-wayjourney that has Sufism as the last station. Asa matter of fact, he wantedthe readerto avoid the otherstations becausehe tried them and found them notsuitable for the aim of this tour which is the attainmentof trueknowledge.

In the introduction of At-Munqmdh.Al-Ghazzaliyy de-scribed his quest for knowledge, his attemp to examinecreedand everysector group, asan on going processthatbeganwhen he was less than twenty yearsold. Accordingto him, this processcontinuedon; he said that It was stillthe casewith him at the time he wasmorethan fifty yearsold.9 This statementsupportsthe ideathat he maintainedhis inquisitive nature throughout his life. Moreover, hedeclaredthat his “thirst to perceivethe reality of things”was an instinct (gharlzah) that was placed in his natureby Allah [S.W.TJ and, therefore,he had no choice but toseektrue knowledge.’°

Al-Ghazzaliyy describedthe history of his searchfortrue knowledge.The first changein his epistemologywasto break away from conformism (taqUki) which he definedas uncritical acceptanceof knowledge, presented byparentsor teachers,as true. As a result, he rejected allinheritedcreed(at- ‘aqa’td al-mawrfithah).According to him,the inherited creed Is nothing but dictated knowledge(tatqinmyyât)which is receivedby way of imitation. He heldthat this source of knowledge (i.e. taqtid) is responsiblefor the differencesbetween people.” He emphasizedtheneccessityto reject conformism as an essential step inany searchfor true knowledge.

A1-Ghazzâliyy realized the necessityof defining thenatureof knowledgeaspart of his searchfor the reality ofthings. He reachedthe conclusion that peremptoryknow-ledge (at- ‘tim aI-yaqiniyy) Is that knowledge which isindubitable and devoid of mistakeor Illusion regardlessof

9 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqldh, p. 79.10 Ibld..p.81.ii lbid.,pp.81—82.

137

AL-GlIAZZALIYY

the circumstances. It is here that he compared the certitudethat he was seeking with that which is generated in math-ematics (e.g. as the certitude that results from knowingthat ten is greaterthan three).’2

A1-Ghazzaliyy used his concept of peremptory know-ledge as•a criterion to veril~~the sciencesthat he acquiredpreviously. He fond that the sensibles (at-hisstyat~andlogical necessities (at-dariTtriyyãt) which he believed to betrustworthy for a while, proved to be subject to doubt and,therefore, he categorized them in terms of certitude alongwith the knowledgeacquiredthrough conformism.’3

A1-Ghazzaliyy’s language in A1-Munqmdh is differentfrom that of previous works, where he used to present hisdiscussions regarding the sources of knowledge in inde-pendent sentencesor clauses.There was a transitionbetweendefiningperemptoryknowledgeandits applicationto the sensiblesand logical necessities:he usedthe term“next” (thumma)at the beginningof a new chapter(I.e. TheAvenues to Sophistry and Agnosticism)14 in addition toother places.15 The use of this conjunction in Arabic (I.e.thumna) createsa senseof continuity that portrays thewhole processas a systematicapproachto epistemology.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s doubt of the senseswas baseduponhis examinationof sight (basar) which he consideredthestrongest sense; if he could doubt sight then he coulddoubt the rest of the sensesas well. He provided severalaccountswhere sight Is deceived.In oneof theseexampleshe said:

‘The strongestof the sensesis the senseof sight. Nowthis looks at a shadow and sees it standing still andmotionless and judges that motion must be denied.

12 Al-Ghazzali~,A1-Munq(dh. p. 82.13 Ibid., p. 83.14 R.J. Mccarthy translatedthetitle of this chapterMadakhll a!-Safsata

Wa JaM at- ‘Ulum, as ‘The Avenuesof Sophistry and Skepticism.’I think that Al-Ghazzaliyy did not Intend “Jahd al- ‘Viunf as skep-ticism here,atranslationwhich cannotbejustified linquistically. Theliteral translationis ‘denial of thesciences”whichthecontextrendersit closer to the conceptof agnosticism rather than skepticism ordoubt. A1-Ghazzaliyy,Freedom, p. 64.

15 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqldh. pp. 82-83.

138

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFORKNOWLEDGE...

Then,dueto experienceand observation,an hourlaterit knows that the shadowis moving, and that it did notmove in a sudden spurt. but so gradually and imper-ceptibly that it was never completely at rest.”’

6

Al-Ghazzaliyy realized that while the judge of thesensesfinds the sensiblesacceptable, the reason judgerefutes the latter judgement. At this stage, he trustedthe knowledge that comes through reason and whichbelongs to “the category of primary truths (at-awwatiy-yãt), suchasassertingthat Ten is greaterthan three’, and‘One and the same cannot be simultaneously affirmedand denied’, and ‘One and the samecannot be incipientand eternal, existent and nonexistent, necessaryandimpossible’)7

Soon Al-Ghazzaliyy found that his trust in reasonwas also challenged. He was presented with anotherproblem; it was the personified sensesthat asked himthe following question, “What assurancehave you thatyour rational knowledgeis not like your relianceon sensejudge?”8 The basic argument is that the existence of ahigher faculty makes the lower one doubtful and if itwas not for the reasonjudge, he would havetrusted thesense.How then can he be sure that thereis not a higherjudge than that of reason which once reveals itself, itgives the lie to the judgement of reason?Moreover, thefact that thereis no appearanceof this higher faculty doesnot indicatethe impossibility of its existence.’9

Furthermore, this problem was reinforced by Al-Ghazzaliyy’s soul, which hesitatedabout the answer, byappealingto dreaming2°sayIng:

16 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Freedomand Fulfiulmpnt, p. 64.17 Ibid.. p. 65.18 Ibid.19 Al-Ghazzahyy,Al-Munqidh, pp. 84—85.20 R.J. Mccarthy mistakenly thought that it is the sensejudgewhich

reinforcedits position by appealingto dreaming.In Arabic. theterm‘judge” (hakim) is masculine while both the ‘soul” (al-nafs) and‘reinforced’ (ayyadat):theverb reinforcedhasto be in themasculineform ayyada in order for Mccarthy’s translation to be correct. Inaddition, thesuffixedpronountwin ishkalaha(Its problem)is feminineand, therefore,refers to the soul and not the judge. Al-Ghazzallyy.Freedom,p. 65 and al-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqirlh, p. 85.

139

AL-GHAZZALIYY

“Don’t you see that when you are asleepyou believecertain things and imaginecircumstancesand believetheyarefixed andlastingand entertainno doubtsaboutthatbeingtheir status?Thenyouwakeup andknowthatall your imaginings and beliefs were groundlessandunsubstantial,Sowhileeverythingyou believethroughsensationor intellection in your waking state may betrue in relationto that state,what assurancehaveyouthat you may not suddenlyexperiencea statewhichwould havethe samerelationto your waking stateasthe latterhasto your dreaming,andyour wakingstatewould be dreamingin relation to that new and furtherstate?Ifyou foundyourselfinsuchastate,you wouldbesure that all your rational beliefswere unsubstantialfancies.”

Al-Ghazzallyy thought this statebeyondreasonmightbe either that which the Sufis claim is theirs, or death. Inthe first case, the Sufis allege in their states that whenthey concentrate Inwardly and suspend their sensation,they seephenomenawhich are not In accordwith reason.The other possibility is death,wherehe derivedthis notionfrom what he falsely believed to be a Hadith in whichthe Prophet [S.A.A.S.J said, “People are asleep: then afterthey die theyawake”,22 In addition, he held that this notioncorrespondsto a verse in the Qur’an which says, “Butwe haveremovedfrom you your veil and today your sightis keen”.23

A1-Ghazzaliyyexplainedthat he could not find a wayout of these thoughts, because to arrange any proofhe needed to combine primary truths, which was in-admissibleat the time. Hence,he was left In the conditionof rejecting as false all kinds of knowledge. which lastedfor two months.He regardedthis condition as practicallyequivalent to sophistry (safsata),’4but his condition didnot extendto utteranceor doctrine.25

21 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Freedon-tandFulfillment, p.65.22 This narrationis not a Hadith: MuhammadAl-Hut relatedin Asna

at-Matolibfi Aho4ith Mukhtol(/bt at-Marattb that this Is a saying ofAu thn AIM Talib, the fourth caliph. SeeAl-Ghazzaliw,A1-Munqldh,pp. 85-86.

23 Al-Qur’an, Suraai-Ma’minun 50:22.24 SafsatahIs anArabicizedform of Greeksophas.25 A1-Ghazzailyy,Freedomand Fl4filbnent,p. 66.

140

AL-GHAZZALIYY’s QUESTFORKNOWLEDGE...

Al-Ghazzaliyy consideredthis condition as a sicknesswhich was “healed” by a light (nfui that Allah has [S.W.T.]casteinto his chest.He came to regardthis light asthe keyto mostknowledge.From It, heregainedhis trust in neces-saryrational knowledge(al-darüriyydt at-‘aqliyyal4. He as-sertedthat one should not restrict the possibility of un-veiling truth (al-kashjj to preciselyformulatedproofs.26

Al-Ghazzaliyy reflectedon this experiencein terms ofthe concept of “dilation” (al-sharh).27 In the Qur’an thereis aversewhich reads,“So he whom Allah wishes to guidearight, He dilates28 his breast for submission to Himself(i.e. to embrace Islam)”.’9 In a Hadith, the Prophet [S.A.A.S.Jinterpretedthis verseas follows, “It is a light which Allahcastsinto the heart.” Then someone said, “And what is thesign of it?” He replied, “Withdrawal from the mansionof delusionand turning to the mansionof Immortality” .~°

Al-Ghazzaliyy also adverted to other Hadiths on thesame subject, concluding that one should seek to unveiltruth through that light which gushes forth from thedivine generosity, and one must be on the watch for it.He added that these narrations are intended so oneshould seek truth in areas other than primary truthswhich aregiven,3’

After his trust In primary truths was reinstated atthe end of this period of doubt, Ai-Ghazzaliyy returned tosearching for true knowledge in the teachings of everysectand schoolof thought. Eventuallyhenarrowedthelistof the “classesof seekers”to the Batinites, the dialecticaltheologians (al-Mutakallimftn), the philosophers and theSufis. His aim was to show that only the Sufis possessedthe methodolo~r(i.e. “tasting” or dhawq) that leadto trueknowledge.32

26 Al-C}hazzaliyy. Al-Munqidh, p. 86.27 Shm-hisametaphoricalexpansionof thebreastin orderto indIcatean

acceptanceof or to accommodatetruth.28 ‘All translatedthe meaning of yashmhas “openeth’. See Yusuf ‘All,

TazjamatMa’antat-Qur’anal-Karlm,p.326.29 Al-Qur’an, Surahal-An’am6:125.30 Al-Ghazzaliyy, FreedomandFulfillment, p. 66,31 Al-Ghazzaliyy,AI-Munqidh, pp. 87-88.32 Thisstagewasdiscussedat lengthin chapterthree.See p. 93.

141

AL-GHAZZL~YY

5.1.1 The Influence of al-Munqidh on Descartes

‘Uthman Ka’ak related that he found a translated copyof at-Murtqidh in Deàcartes’ library in Paris with hiscommentsin the margin.33Although thereis no accountofthe nature of these comments, I think a comparison ofDescartes’ epistemologywith that of Al-Ghazzaliyy is inorder, becauseof theremarkablesimilarities.

Like Al-Ghazzaliyy, Descartesexpressedhis dissa-tisfaction with authoritative instruction which he consi-dered deceptive.Therefore,as soon as his age permittedhim to passfrom under the control of his instructors, heabandonedformal studying: hebegantravellingandholdingintercoursewith men of different disposition by way ofstudying what he described as the great book of theworld.34 This position is similar to that of al-Ghazzaliyyregarding conformism.Descartesdescribedhis delight inthe certitude of mathematic.35 Likewise, A1-Ghazzaliyymadethecertitudeof mathematicsasthecriteriaheaspiredto reachin all knowledge,36Again,Descartesconsideredtherevealedtruthsto be beyondthescopeof reason’scompre-hension,andthattherewasaneedof “somespecialhelpfromheaven”in order to understandthem.37This Is comparableto Al-Ghazzãliyy’s assertion that sharh is some specialhelp from heaven.In addition, like Descarteshe held thatreasonis impotent to veri~’revealedtruths.

The most importantcomparisonbetweenthetwo is inthe stepseachone took forward verification of knowledge.Descartesdoubtedthesenseandreason,and thenfollowedwith a comparisonof knowledgein dreamingto thatof beingawake.He said:

“When I consideredthat the very same thoughts(presentations)which we experiencewhenawakemayalsobeexperiencedwhenweareasleep,while thereis at

33 A1-Qardawiyy, AI-Ghazzaliyy,p. 115.34 Descartes,Discourseon Methodand the Meditations. John Veitch,

trans. (Bufalo: PrometheusBooks, 1989)p. 15.35 Descartes.p. 14.36 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Munqidh,p. 82.37 Descartes,p. 14.

142

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE...

that time not one of themtrue, I supposedthat all theobjects (presentations)that had ever enteredinto mymind when awake, had in them no more truth thanthe illusions of my dreams,”38

He went on to ask:

‘How do we knowthethoughtswhich occurin dreamingare false rather than those other which we experiencewhen awake, since the former are often not less vividand distinct than the latter?”39

All these steps made Descartesconsiderevery ideathat he hadasfalse, exceptthat he who thinks must exist,and thereforeestablishedthe first principle of his philoso-phy.40 Al-Ghazzaliyy followed the samesteps:he doubtedthe senses,reason and presenteda similar account re-garding the relationship betweenknowledge in dreamingand that of being awake,saying:

“Don’t you seethat whenyou are asleepyou believecertainthings andimaginecertain circumstancesandbelieve they are fixed and lasting and entertainnodoubtsaboutthatbeingtheir status?Thenyouwakeupand know that all your imaginingsand beliefs weregroundlessand unsubstantial.Sowhile everythingyoubelievethroughsensationor intellecuonin yourwakingstatemaybe true in relationto that state,whatassur-ancehaveyou thatyou maynot suddenlyexperienceastatewhichwouldhavethesamerelationtoyourwakingstateasthelatterhasto yourdreaming,andyourwakingstatewould be dreamingin relationto that new andfurtherstate?”4’

It is apparentthat there are numerous similaritiesbetweenA1-MunqidhandDiscourseonMethod,which seemtosupportKa’ak’s observations.Thus it seemthat an investi-gation of A1-Ghazzãliyy’s influence upon Descartesmightbe a profitable line of research.Such an investigation is,

38 Descartes,pp. 30.39 Ibid., pp. 33—34.40 Ibid.. p. 30.41 Ai-Ghazzaiiyy, Freedomand Fulfillment, p. 65.

143

AL-Gl-IAZZALIYY

however, beyond the scope of this book.

5.1.2. The Stages of Epistemological Developmentin HumanBeings

Al-Ghazzaliyy outlined the epistemologicaldeveloment inhumanbeingsIn his chapter, ‘The True Natureof Prophecyand the Need All Men Have for It” in A1-Mwiqidh. He beganwith the essence of man in his original condition at thetime of his creation and held that man is born devoid ofany knowledge of the existing things. Each category ofthe existing things is known through a perception (idrak)that is created,42

In the first stageof development,the sensearecreatedin the humanbeing. The first thing to be createdin thisstageIs the senseof touch (hñssataZ-tams).The categoryperceivedwith It includesthe knowledgeof heatand cold,wetnessanddryness,and softnessandharshnessIn addi-tion to others.Next, sight Is createdfor him with which heperceivescolorsandshapes.Al-Ghazzaliyyconsideredthiscategorythe largest of the “world” of the sensibles.Next,hearingis createdin him with which he hearssoundsandtones.Next, tastingIs createdfor him, andso on until hepassesthe “world” of the senslbles.3

The secondstagecomesafter all the sensesarecom-pleted.TheonlythingtobecreatedIn thehumanbeingat thisstageis discernment(tamyiz)and It is createdat theageofseven.~With discernment, the human being perceivesthings other than the senslbles.45Al-Ghazzallyy did notprovideexamplesof the things perceivedon this level.

Following discernment,the human being ascendstothe third level where reason is created.With reasonhe

42 Al-Ghazzaliyy. al-Munqld.h,p 144.43 IbId.. pp. 144—145.44 It might bethatAl-Ohazzaliyychoseage seven for thebeginningof new

stagefrom aHadith, part of whichIndicatesthatchildrenneedto betaughtprayer,at ageseven thoughit doesnotbecome obligatory(MuruAwladakumDi al-Salati 1dM Bakighu Sabah..,)This Hadith wasverified by Ahmad thn Hanbal,Abu Dawud and al-Hakim who heldthat It Is sound(sahih)accordingto thecriterionof Muslim.

45 Al-Ghazzaliyy,al-Munqldh, p. 145.

144

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOwLEDGE...

perceivesthe necessary,the possibleand the Impossiblein addition to mattersthat are not perceivedin the stagesbefore.46

The fourth stage is that which comes after reason,somethingwhich Al-Ghazzaliyy does not gIve a specificname. It is alwaysdescribedin terms of its order relativeto reason,He held that another “eye” is openedat thisstage,andthat it Is usedto “see” metaphysicalthings.Theknowledgethat is acquiredthrough this faculty is the oneusually attaIned by the prophets; only part of it can beachelvedthrough “tasting” (dhawq) by following the Sufisway.47 Al-Ghazzaliyy’sargumentin supportof the existenceof this faculty is basedupon the relationshipbetweenthedIfferent stages,he said:

“Justasthe intellect’is oneof man’sstagesin whichhereceivesan ‘eye” by which he “sees”variousspeciesofintelligibles from which thesensesarefar removed,thepropheticpore is an expressionsigni~’inga stageinwhichmanreceIvesan“eye” possessedof alight, andinits light the unknown and other phenomenanot nor-mally perceivedby the intellectbecomevisible.”48

The importance of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s account of whatmight be describedasthepost-Intellectfaculty, canbe seenasaresponseto theMuslim philosopherswhoplacedreasonas the highest faculty of knowledgeand, therefore,deniedprophecy. In addition, it canbe considereda responsetothosewho equatedthe Shari’ahwith wisdom(hikrnah) and,thus, prophecywould appearsubservientto the intellect.49

5.2 AL-MTJSTASFAMliv ‘ILM AL-IiTSUL

A1-Ghazzaliyywrote Ai-MustasJ& mitt ‘Jim aL-Usüi (The Fil-teredin the FundamentalsofJurisprudence)at therequestof some studentsof Jurisprudenceat the Nlzãmiyyah ofNishapur.Theywantedabookwhich wouldbemedianin Its

46 Al-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Munqidli. p. 145.47 IbId., pp. 145—148.48 Ai-Ghazzaliyy. Freedomand Fulfillment, p. 98.49 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Munqidh, p. 161

145

AL-GHAZZALIYY

sizerelativeto Tahdhibal-Usul which they haveconsIderedvery long and A1-Mankhui which does not have enoughdetails.5°

In this sectiononAi-Mustas,fa,I will inquireinto whetherAl-GhazzAliyy remainedfaithful to the epistemologycon-tained in Sufism and whether It had any impact on thefundamentalsof jurisprudence.His basic epistemologicalpositionis includedin boththeprefaceandtheintroduction.

Unlike the introductionof Ai-Mankh,Tilwhich addressedthe relationship of jurisprudenceto the fundamentalsofjurisprudence,5’ the preface to Ai-Mustasfabeganwith acriticism of this world for beingdeceptiveand for notbeinga place of happiness.Al-Ghazzaliyy was calling peopletoconsiderthis world asa passageto the nextone.Accordingto him, both reasonand the Shari’ah agreeto this latterposition.52Certainly, the tone of the latter Is that of a Sufirather than that of a jurist.

In this preface,he also provided two classificationsof the sciences.In the first classification, he divided thesciencesinto threecategoriesaccordingto their relationswith reasonand theShari’ah. In the second,he divided thesciencedinto two categoriesonly: rational (‘aqiiyyah) andreligious (dlniyyah).The first category comprises purelyrational (‘aqiiyy mahcl)sciencessuchas mathematics,geo-metry andastronomy.Thesesubjects are basedon eitherfalse opinions, or true knowledge that is not useful. Al-Ghazzaliyyadmitsthat thesesciencesdo yield benefit, buttheyareworldly and,therefore,do not help in attaIningrealhappinessin the hereafter. This language Indicates thecontinuity of hisSufi vision of theworld, In addition, heheldthat the Shari~ahIs neutral regarding the study of thesesciences;It neitherencouragesnor discouragesit.53

The second category is what he consideredpurelytextual (naqityymo.hd). It comprisessciencesof theShari’ahsuchasHadith andexegesis(i.e.of the Qur’an). He argued

50 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Al-Mustasfa mEn ‘Urn al-Usul (cairo: al-Matba’ah al-Axni,’lyyah, 1904)Vol. I, p.6.

51 Al-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Mankhul, p. 3.52 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Mustasfa,Vol. I, p. 3.53 Ibid., Vol. I. p.3.

146

AL-GHAZZAL1YVS QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE...

that these sciencesdependon memory and that reasonplays no role in them.

The third category comprisesthe sciences,such asthe fundamentalsof jurisprudence,that draw on both theShari’ah and reason. According to Al-Ghazzaliyy, thiscategoryis the mosthonorable.It is betterthanthe sciencesthat arebasedon purereasonanddo notenjoy the accept-anceof the Shari’ah, andit is also better than the sciencesof the Shari’ah that are basedon pure conformlsm (muMal-taqiid) that Is notsupportedby reason,M

Turning to his secondclassificaton.Al-Ghazzaliyy In-tendedthis classificationto showthe relationshipbetweenthefundamentalsofjurisprudenceand therestof sciences.Therational includessciencessuchasmedicine,arithmeticand geometry; these sciencesare of no concern to thefundamentalsofjurisprudence.Thereligioussciencescom-prise dialectical theology,jurisprudence,the fundamentalsofjurisprudences,Hadith, exegesisand thescienceof eso-teric knowledge(‘tim al-balm) or the scienceof the heart(i.e.the onethat cleansit).55

Therational andthe religiouscategoriesinclude somesciencesthatareconcernedwith universalsandothersthatare concernedwith particulars; the sciencewhich is con-cernedwith universalsis superior to one concernedwithparticulars.Among thereligious sciences.kalamaddressesuniVersals,while all other religious sciencesare concernedwith particulars. The latter includejurisprudence,funda-mentalsofJurisprudence,Hadith and exegesis.56

Al-Ghazzaliyy elevatedkaIa.mto the highestof the re-ligious sciencesbecauseall othersare dependenton It. Hemaintainedthat not everyonehas to study it; only thosewho wish to be considered an absolute scholar (‘aIImmutiaq) and knowledgeableIn all the religious sciences,should acquire kalâm,57This posItion regarding kalam istotally different from that presentedIn th� Ihya’ in whichAl-Ghazzaliyy, newlyunderthe influenceof Sufism, under-

54 Al-Ohazzaliyy, Al-Mustasfa,Vol. 1, p.S55 Ibid.,Vol. i, p. 5.56 mid.57 Ibid., Vol. 1, Pp. 5—7.

147

AL-GHAZZALIYY

mined kaiam and regardedIt as a veil that prevents theattainmentof peremptoryknowledge.58

The roleof kaiam is restrictedto studyingexistencebyusing reason.It establishesthe necessityof a Creatorandthat it is possiblefor Him to sendmessengers,and that thepossiblebecamereality. Thelastthing to verilSr is the truth-fulness of the Prophet LS.A.A.S.] and after that, reasonreceivesfrom the Prophet IS.A.A.S.1 knowledge that it canneither reachby itself, nor render Impossible.59The otherreligioussciencesaddresspartsof themessageoftheProphet[S.A.A.S.J, “ExegesisIs concernedwith the meaningof theQur’an, the scienceof Hadith verifies the soundnessof theHadith,jurisprudencecoverstherulingsthatareconcernedwith the actionsof the mukallaf.6°and the fundamentalsofJurisprudence pertains to the sources of the latter rulings”.61

Of theseparticular religious sciences,the fundamen-tals of jurisprudenceIs especiallyimportant.Al-Ghazzaliyylisted the Qur’an,Sunnahandconsensus(ai-~jmd’)62astheonly sourcesof this sciences.63He used reason to deriveknowledge (e.g. by analogy. qiyas) from these threesources.~Al-Ghazzallyyemphasizedhis restriction of thesourcesof the Shari’ah to thesethree wheneverhe men-tioned them togetherby adding “only” (faqafl.65This posi-tion is consistent wIth ai-Mankhui, his first book on thefundamentalsof jurisprudence written as a student, inwhich he also held the Qur’an, Sunnahandconsensusasthe only three sourcesof the Sharl’ah.66The question iswhetherthis restrictionofthe sourcesof theSharl’ahmarksa new stage in the developmentof Al-Ghazzaliyy’s epIste-mology, In which he returnedto traditional positions?This

56 A1-Ghazzallyy, Ihya’, Vol. I. pp. 22-23.59 Al-Ghazzallyy. AI-Mustasfa,vol. 1, p.6.60 Mukallafis theadult ti.e. whoreachedpuberty] and sane Muslim.61 Al-Ohazzaiiyy, At-Mustasfa.Vol.1. p.S.62 Al-Ghazzaliyy definedconsenses(ynial asthecommonagreementofall

acknowledgedMuslim scholars(oh! al-hal Wa aI-’aq~on anyoneissuein religion. Seeal-Ghazzaliyy,al-Mustasfa,Vol. I, pp. 173-174.

63 A1-Ghazza1i~,Al-Mustasfa.p.6.64 IbId., Vol. I. p. 7.65 Ibid., Vol. 1, pp.6—7.66 A1-Ghazzaliyy,At-Mankhul, pp. 4—6.

148

AL-GHAZZLIYYS QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE...

questioncanbe answeredby referenceto the theory thatI presentedin Chapter11,67where I argued that Al-Ghaz-zaliyy maintainedtwo independentlines of thought. In thefirst, he pursuedperemptory knowledge (‘tim yaqin); thisline of thought, I believe, constituteshis searchfor uni-versal truths. In the second,he sought particular truthsin sciencessuchasthe fundamentalsof jurisprudence.

The last book that Al-Ghazzaliyy wrote during thisperiod,Al-Imld’fi Mushkilal-Ihya’,65Includesharshcriticismof those who were critical of the Ihya’, and very strongarguments in defenseof SulIsm and the possibility ofattaining metaphysicalknowledgeby the post-reasonfa-culty. Thisdefenseassertsbeyondany doubt that he main-tained his Sufi beliefs, at least till the end of the secondperiodof public teaching.

The introduction to al-Mustasjà is for all practicalpurposesan introduction to logic, which he consideredaconciseform of what he presentedin MUIQJCat-Nazarft at-Mantiq (TheTouch-Stoneof Reasoningin Logic) and Mi’yãrat-‘Jim ft aI-Manttq (The Criterion of Knowledge in Logic).AlthoughA1-Ghazzaliyyincludedthisintroductiontologic atthebeginningof al-MustasfU,hedid notconsiderit apartofthe fundamentalsof Jurisprudence.Nevertheless,he heldthat logic is the prerequisiteof all the sciences,and thatwhoeverdoesnot acquire logic cannot expect to havehisknowledgetrusted.69

5.3 AL-IMLA’ Fl ISIIKAIST AL-IIIYA’

Thisbook, Al-Imla’fl Ishkãlatat- Ihy&’ (TheDictation on theProblemsof al-Ihya’), waswritten in responseto thecriticismthat the Ihyã’ hadenduredat the handsof traditionalistswhom Al-Ghazzaliyy did no mention by name.Accordingto A1-Ghazzãllyy, they held that his book contradictstheShari’ahin advocating“unveiling” (mukEzshafah)asasource

67 Seep. 55.68 This book, at-Imla’ft Mushkil at-Ihya’. is pubilshedasan appendixto

Thya’ ‘Ulum at-Din. See al-Ghazzaliyy,Ihya’, Appendix(al-Mulhag). pp.13-41. Subsequently.I will referto it as At-Imla’.

69 A1-Ghazzaiiyy, al-MusEasfa,Vol. I, p. 10.

149

AL-GHAZZALIYY

of knowledgeand, therefore,they tried to censureit.7°The importanceof this book is basedon two elements;

its subject matter and timing. In al-Imlã’, Al-GhazzaliyydefendsSufismand the knowledgethat canbe derivedfromit. Chronologically, it waswritten at the endof the secondperiod of public teachingat the Ni~aml~ahof Nishapur. Itis clear, therefore that, contraryto the many voiceswhicharguethat he beganto changehis Sufi methodtowardstheend of his life, and that he adopted the method of thetraditionalistswho statedthat“unveiling” (mukashafali)asasourceof knowledgecannotbejustifiedfromthepointofviewof theShari’ah,thatAl-Ghazzaliyymadeno suchchangesinhis thoughtduring this period. Rather,In his replyto thosewho were critical of Sufism, Al-Ghazzaliyy defendedtheexistenceof divine knowledgeal- ‘tim at-t&hiyy).7’ It Is certainthat thiswork supportsthe notion thatheremainedfaithfulto his Sufi methoduntil the endof this period; whetherhemaintainedthesameepistemologyduring the final periodofhis life Is somethingthat we shallbe consideringnext.

70 A1-Ghazzaliyy,Al-Imfrf. p. 10.71 Ibid., p. 16.

150

Chapter SIX

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE:THE SECOND WITHDRAWAL FROM PUBLICTEACHING(503-505A.H./ 1110-1111C.E.)

Thischapterdealswith thelast stagein Al-Ghazzãliyy’s lifewhich extendedfrom his wIthdrawal’ from public teachingat the Nizamiyyahof Nishapuruntil hisdeathin 505A.H./1111 C.E. During this period, he wrote three books: Al-Durrah aI-Fdkhirahfl Kashf ‘Ulüm at-Akhirah (The PreciousPearlIn Unveiling the Sciencesof the Hereafter),Iljäm al-‘Awdm ‘an ‘Jim al-Kalàm (Preventingthe Common Peoplefrom Engaging In the Scienceof Kalãm) and Minh4j al-‘Abicilri (TheCourseof the Worshippers),2

Theaim of thIschapterIs totracethelastdevelopmentsIn hIs epistemologyand to question the elaim that heabandonedSufism and adopted the method of the tra-dItionalists who considerthe Qur’an and the Sunnah asthe two major sourcesof knowledge.AccordIng to al-IjàflzAbü al-Qãsim Ibn ‘Asäkir. Al-Ghazzãliyy studied Al-Bukhäriyy’s Sahik at the hands of Abü Sahl MukiammadIbn ‘Ubayd Allah Al-Hafsiyy.3 Nevertheless,It seemsthat‘Abd al-Ghãflr Al-Färisiyy, Al-Ghazzãliyy’s student and

1 Accordingto Badawl. thereare no primary sourcesthat contain theexactdateof his withdrawal from the Nlzarnlyyah. He suggeststhatA1-Ghazzallwmight havewithdrawnsometime aftertheassassinationof vizier Fakhr al-Mulk In 500 A.H./1106 c.E. Badawi’s opinion isbasedon theideathatFakhral-Mulk pressuredAl-Ohazzallyyto teachat the Nizamlyyah of Nishapur. and that when Fakhral-Mulk wasassassinated,hedid not feel obligatedto continueteaching.SeeBadawl.Mu’allafat. p. xxv.

2 Badawi,Mu’allafat, p. xvii.3 Al-Subklyy, vol. IV, p. 200.

151

AL-GHAZZALIYY

the Khatib4 of Nishapur, was the first one to relate hisstrong interestin studyingHadith. He said:

“He (A1-Ghazzaliyy)concluded(thelastyearsof his life)by studyingtheHadithof ProphetMuhammadIS.A.A.S.1andby interactingwith thescholarsofHadith.Hebeganreadingthe two booksof soundHadith:Al-Bukhariyy’sSahih and Muslim’s Sahih.5Had he lived longer, hewould have,in shorttime, excelledin this artmorethaneverybodyelse. In addition, he studiedAbü DawüdAl-Sijistaniyy’s Sunan6at the handsof AbU al-Fath Al-Hakimi Al-Thsiyy.”7

Onecannotdenythat Al-Fàrisiyy’s statementindicatesa seriousattempt by A1-Ghazzãliyy to study Hadith. Thisdoes not prove, however, as Dimashqiyyah attempts toshow that Al-Ghazzàliyy returned to the method of thetraditionalists (al-SalaJ).8The statement Is quoted byDimashqiyyah from a page in Al-Subkiyy’s ~abàqat at-Shàfi’iyyah al-Kubrà in which Al-Färisiyy held that Al-Ghazzàliyy, upon his return to Tus, establishedhis ownschool and built a lodge for the Sufis (khãnaqãh U at-S4ftyyah).Moreover,hedevotedpartof his time for theSufiswhoweredescribedasthepeopleofthehearts(aid al-qultTdT4.9It is obviousthat this historical accountof building a lodgefor the Sufis andattending to them is an Indication of acontinuedinterestin Sufism.It remainsthat a studyof hislast threebooksis essentialIn determiningA1-Ghazzàliyy’sprecisestandregardingSufism.

6.1 AL-PURRARAL-FAKWP.AJIFl K.4,SHF‘ULIIM AL-AIUfiRAN

This book Al-Durrah aI-Fakhirahfi Kashf ‘utüm al-Akhtrah

4 Khatib is the Imam who leads the Friday prayer which includes aKhutbah (speech).This Khutbahis consideredpart of theprayer.

5 Accordingto Al-Hafiz AbuSa’dIbn al-Sam’aniyy.Al-Ghazzallyy studiedthetwo booksof Sahthat thehandsofThu ai-Fltyan‘Umar IbnAbu al-Hasanal-Rawasiyyal-Haflaal-Tusiyy. Seeal-Subkiyy,Vol. IV, p. 215.

6 This is anothercollection of Hadlth whichis consideredbelowthelevelof theSaNk

7 Al-Subkiyy, Vol. IV, pp. 210-212.8 Dimashqiyyah,AbuHamid at-GhazattWa at-Thsauiwuf,p. 366.9 A1-Subkiyy, Vol. IV, p. 210.

152

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE THE SECOND WITHDRAWAL...

(The PreciousPearlin Unveiling the Sciencesof the Here-after) is less theoretical than the other two books. It isconcernedprimarily with Islamic eschatology;it describesin great details themessuch as death, the HeavensandHell. Nevertheless,there are scatteredstatementswhichindicate his high esteemfor the Sufis whom he describedasthe Gnostics (al-’anjiin). He saidthat some of thosewhodie proceedthrough the seven Heavensuntil they reachthe Throne (i.e. of Allah) . Someof them are deniedaccessto Allah; only the Gnostics who know Him (‘artjiui) willreachHim.’°

In anotherplacein the Durrah~he relatesthe story ofProphetMuhammad’sintercession(shafa’ah) on behalfofhis own peopleon the day of judgement.This Intercessionbeginswith praisingAllah [S.W.T.] in a fashionthatwasnotusedbefore. As to the natureof this praise. Al-Gha.zzaliyyquotedsomeGnostics(ba’da!- ‘ãrtfln) whoarguedthat It wasoriginally “Allah’s glorification of Himself at the time HecompletedHis creation(i.e., of theworld).””

Theterm “Gnostic” is also usedIn a third context.Al-Ghazzãliyylisted the categoriesof thosewho are savedonthe day ofjudgement.Theyare: thebelieversIai-mu’miruTrn),the Muslims (aI-muslimUnj, the doers of good works (a!-rruthsirthn), the Gnostics(ci- ‘ànjuin), the believersin revela-tion (al-siddiqun), the martyrs (aI-shuhadã’), the righteous(al-salihUn) and the messengers(al-mursalUn).’2 It shouldbe noted that all of thesecategoriesare mentionedIn theQur’an,with the exceptionof the “Gnostics”.

All of these three instances involving the Gnostics,namely, reaching the presenceof Allah, acceptanceoftheirargumentregardingtheexaltationofAllah [S.W.T.], andcreating a specialcategoryfor them along with the mes-sengerson the day of resurrectionare clear indications ofAl-Ghazzãliyycontinuedacceptanceof Sufis.

10 A1-Ghazzaliyy. Al-Durrah al-Fakhirah ft Kashf ‘Ulum al-AkhU-ah,MuhammadMustafaThu al-’Ula, ed.(cairo:Maktabatal-Gindi, 1968)p. 126.This bookwasprinted asanappendixto Sir al-’Alamin, abookthatwasascribedto Al-Ghazzaliyy.

11 Al-Ghazzaliyy, At-Durrah, p. 151.12 mid.

153

AL-GHAZZALIYY

6.2 ILLJAM AL-’AWAM ‘AN ‘EM AL-KALAM

Al-Ghazzãliyy wrote I~amal- ‘Awàm ‘an ‘JUn al-Kalàm (Pre-ventingthe CommonPeoplefrom Engagingin the ScienceofKalàm) inorder to explainthecreedof thefir stgenerationofMuslims (i.e. al-SalajJ regardingdivine attributes, and toprovethat their position is right and that anyotherpositionis an innovation (bid’ah). He held that this is necessarytoavoid questionsof anthropomorphism.’3

This book wasunderstoodasa criticism of kalàmandmetaphorical interpretation (ta’wil) of divine attributeswhich forms the essentialstand of the later generationofAsh’arites Including Al-Ghazzãliyy. This position wasmisunderstoodby many scholarsincluding Dimashqiyyah,who said:

“He experimentedwith Sufism: its illusion, self-mortifi-cation, “tasting”, emotion, circle of dhfkr (hadrah) andseclusion,believingthe claimof its masterthatwhatisright is notreceivedfrom written revelation,but ratherfrom the hidden esoteric (source),and that Allah theExalteddid notprovideguidancefor thepeopleinwhat-everversesHe sentdownfor them,butratherin whatHehid for the possessorsof the stations (maqàmatjandsupernaturalpowers(Who know through)expositions,unveilingsandemanations.Heremainedlike this untilit becameclear to him whenthe train of life passedbyandthesunof his lifetime dwindledthathehadwastedhis life in (seeking)a false illusion and the erroneousimpossible,while the infallible peremptorysource (ofknowledge)waswithin the reachof his hands,ratherclose to his lips andhe died, mayAllah bemerciful tohim,with theSahfhonhischest,’4asif hewereresistingdeathso that he might drink from it (the Sahih) what-ever sips to cleanshis inside which was stuffedwith(knowledge of) the Batinites, philosophy, kalämandSufism,”5

Dimashqiyyahheld that “unveiling”, the sufi sourceofknowledge,is a rival of the scienceof Hadith; he interpreted

13 AI-Ghazzaiiyy, lljam al-’Awam ‘an ‘lIm ai-Kalam, Muhammad al-Mu’taslm billah al-Baghdadlyy,ed. (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi,1985)pp. 51—52.

14 This anecdoteaboutAl-Ghazzaliyy’s deathwasmentionedoriginallyby lbn Taymiyyah.SeeDimashqiyyah,p. 367.

15 Dimashqiyyah,p. 369.

154

AL-GHAZZA1AYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE SECONDWITHDRAWAL,,.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s position as deserting the Sufi path infavour of theSalafiyyahmethodologywhich is basedon theQur’an and the Sunnah.’6 Dimashqiyyah misinterpretedthe meaningof “common people” (‘aw&m) in Iljam at- ‘Awãm.Regardingthe definition of common people,Al-Ghazzaliyysaid:

“Thecategoryof commonpeople(at-‘Awàm) includesthemanof letters(at-adib), thegrammarian(at-na~iawO.thescholarof Hadith (a1~muJ~addithj,the interpreter(i.e. ofthe Qur’an), thejurist andthe Mutakattim.”7

In fact, the Sufis were the only peoplewho were notconsideredamongthe ‘Awamand, therefore,they weretheonly onesqualifiedto achievedivine knowledge.Heheldthatonly onein tenSufiswill reachwhathedescribedasthe keptsecret(al-sir al-makhzfin). Al-Ghazzaliyywantedto preventall thoseincludedin the definition of “commonpeople” fromengagingin Kalflrn and to acceptthe position of the Satafregardingtheinterpretationofdivine attributes.’8 Thus, thepassageDimashqiyyahrefersto providesno basisfor theclaim that Al-GhazzaliyyabandonedSufism.

Instead,Al-GhazzaliyymaintainedthehighestrankfortheSufi, ascanbeseenin thefollowing analogyin which hecompareddivine presenceto that of theSultan, he said:

“The Sultanhasin his kingdomaprivatepalacewhichis surroundedby a courtyardthat hasagatewhereallthe subjectsgatherwithout being permitted to enterthroughthe gate;they arenot permittedto the edgeofthe courtyard. Then the elites of the kingdom arepermittedto enterthroughthe gateandinto thecourt-yardwhere they cansit accordingto their positions(i.e.thehigherthe rank, thecloseronegetsto thepalace),Itcould bethat only thevizier is permittedto the privatepalacewherethe king revealsto the vizier whateverhewishesof the secretsof his kingdom, andhe (the king)keepsto himselfmattersthathewould notrevealto him,It is the sameregardinghow close onecanget to thedivine presence.Thegateis whereall the ‘Awam(com-

16 Dimashqiyyah,p.368.17 AI-Ghazzaliyy, Itjam, p. 67.18 Ibid., pp. 67—68.

155

AL-GHAZZALIYY

monpeople)stopand if anyoneof themtrespasses,heshouldbereprimanded.As for theGnostics(at-‘ärijün),they enterthrough the gate into the courtyardwherethey spreadaccording to their ranks without beingable to get close, or even look at the sacredplace(ha,ziratat-qudus) in the centerof the court.”°

This analogy is a clear indication of Al-Ghazzaliyy’sclassification of the Sufis higher than “common people”which include scholarsof Hadith, the very sciencethat hewassupposedto acceptasthe sourceof knowledgeinsteadof “unveiling” accordingto the many claimsin this respect.To avoid any misunderstandings,I should say that heacceptedHadith as a sourceof knowledgethroughouthislife, yet this acceptanceon its own should not leadto anyconclusion regarding his position towards other sourcesof knowledge (e.g.. “unveiling”, kashjj.

Another indication that he did not changehis positionconcerningSufism is his assertionregardingthe existenceof afacultyhigherthan reason. Hereiteratedhis argumentin respectto the inability of reasonto perceivethings suchas the harm that results from sinning or the benefit thatresultsfromobedience(i.e. to theSharl’ah) in relationshiptoafter death.He addedthat all thosewho are rational agreethat reasoncannot lead to specific knowledgesimilar tothat in the Shari’ah, and that only a post-reasonfacultycan perceivemetaphysicalknowledge.2°It is obvious thatAl-Ghazzaliyy maintained his idea on the limitations ofreasonwhich he used to support his argument on theexistenceof afacultyhigherthanreason,which isaccessibleto the Sufis.

6.3 MINHAJAL-’ABID1N

This book, MinhãJ at- ‘Abid{n (The Coursefor the Worship-pers), is the lastwork known to bewritten by Al-Ghazzãliyyat the endof his life; ‘Abd al-Malik lbn ‘Abdullãh, oneof hisstudents,said:

19 A1-Ghazzaliyy, Itjam. pp. 85-86.20 Ibid., p. 87.

156

AL-GHAZZALIYYS QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE:THE SECONDWITHDRAWAL...

“My honorableSheikh, the successfulandhappy mys-tical lmam, Proof of Islam and Ornamentof religion,the honor of the nation, Abü Hãmid MuhammadlbnMuhammadIbn MuhammadA1-GhazzaliyyAl-Tfisiyy,may Allah sancti~’his soul and may Allah raise hisrankin Heavens,dictatedthis concise2’bookwhichwasthe lastbook to be written by him, andonly copiedbyhis veryclosecompanions(khawäsashñbilij.’2

Ibn ‘Abdullah’s prefaceto his own copy of Min.hO,j at-‘Abid&~is importantnotonly becauseit indicatesthat thisis the last book to be written by Al-Ghazzaliyy, but alsobecauseit comes from one of the close companions,orwhat might be describedas a memberof the inner circle,a fact that addsto the certitudeof his statement.

According to Al-Ghazzailyy, this book was written inthe samespirit of the Ihyã’, except that he was hopingthat Minhaj at- ‘Abidin would not draw criticism similar tothe Qiyã’ which he blamedon the inability of the “commonpeople” to understand it. He found consolation in thefact that the Qur’an which Is the perfect word of Allah

wasdescribed,by non-Muslims,of being“storiesofpastnations” (i.e., not revealed),23

Moreover, he kept referring the reader throughoutMinhaj at- ‘Abidin, becauseIt is a concisebook, to readthecorrespondingchapters in the Ihyä’. Al-Gha.zzàliyy givesno indication that he has retracted the basic positionsexpressedin the JIiyã’, which of courseincludeshis viewson the superiority of Suflsm asa sourceof knowledgeoverall other forms.Yet it is clearthat he did notmentioneverything he knew regarding Sufism for fear of misunder-standing.He cited four lines of a poem by Zaynal~’Abldin24in which he held that he kept asa secretthe jewelsof hisknowledgefearinganIgnorantpersonwhowould accusehimof beinganidolator or worse,hemight getkilled if he reveals

21 Minhaj at- ‘Abidtn which hasmore than 240 pagesIs consideredaconcisebook hererelativeto bookslike Ihya’.

22 A1-Ghazzallyy,M(nhnJal-Abidin, MuhammadMustafaAbual-’Ula, ed.(Cairo:Maktabatal-GIndi, 1972). p. 13.

23 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Mtnlwij, p. 14.24 ZaynaI-’AbldIn, ‘Mi Ibn al-HusaynIbn ‘All LbnAbuTalib, thegrandson

of thefourthCaliph.

157

AL-C HAZZALIYY

his knowledge.25This poem representsthe outlook of Al-Ghazzãliyywhen he wrote this book; it shows that he wasnot at easein expressingall that he wantedto say.Never-theless,we shall see direct statementsthat he made infavour of Sufism. - -

Like the Ihyã’, Mirthàj at- ‘Abidirt waswritten to explainthe path to the hereafter.26Al-Ghazzãliyy describedsevenobstacles27that face the person who treads this path.According to him, the arrangementof the contentsof thisbook was an inspiration (ithàm) from Allah [S.W.T.j.28 I willanalyzethe languagethat he used in discussingsome ofthese obstacleswhere he explicitly uses Sufi terms andthemesin orderto determinewhethertherewereanychangesin his epistemology.

The first of theseis the obstacleof scienceandknow-ledge(‘aqabatal-’itmwaal-ma’rtfah). Inordertoworship,oneneedsto know what it is that one is worshippingand to becertainaboutit. To overcomethis obstacle,heheldthat oneshouldseekhelp“from thescholarsof thehereafter(‘ulamã’ai-äkhirah) who are the guides of this path, the saddleofthis nation and the leaders of the Imams. One shouldbenefit from them and should ask them for their goodsupplication(du’ã’) sohe cancrossthis pathwith thehelpofAllah, praise be to him, in order to attain peremptoryknowledge (‘tim at-yaqirO.”2° Al-Qhazzallyy maintained,since he acceptedthe Sufi path asthe only way to acheiveperemptory knowledge. Thus, I understandthe solutionthat Al-Ghazzaliyy provided to this obstacleas an invita-tion for peopleto seeka Sufi Sheikh among those whomhe dscrlbedas “the scholarsof the hereafter” who wouldguide the novice (al-murk!) on this path.

Furthermore, he stated that while studying at thehandsof ateacherfacilitatesknowledgeandmakesit easier

25 Al-Ghazzallyy, Minhaj, p. 15.26 Ibid., p. 255.27 Theseare: ‘aqabatal-Urn Wa a!’rna’njah (theobstacleof knowledge).

aqabat al-tawbah (the obstacleof repentance), ‘aqabat at- ‘awa’iq(the obstacle of obstructions), ‘aqabat at’ ‘awarid (the obstacle ofcrises), ‘aqabatal-bawa‘ith (the obstacleof motivations), ‘aqabat al-qawadih (the obstacleof impunities) and ‘aqabataI-han’id Wa at-shukr(theobstacleof gratitudeandthankfulness).

28 AI-Ghazzaliyy.Minhaj. p. 20.29 Ibid., p. 16.

158

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFORKNOWLEDGE: THE SECONDWITHDRAWAL..

to achieve, Allah bestows his bounty on whomever Hechooses from among His servants and becomes theirdirect Teacher.3°Thelatter statementconformsto the Sufinotion of achievingknowledgedirectly from Allah which isknown as at- ‘Urn aI-Iadurirtiyy.

In his discussionof anotherobstacle,that concerningworldly things, he consideredthe questionof whetheras-ceticism (zuhd) is an obligation ~fard). A1-Ghazzàliyyheldthat asceticismis an obligation in regardto forbidden (4a-ram) things; it is voluntary (naffi concerningwhat is lawful(t~to,iafl.That is to say, refraining from things which areforbiddenis obligatory on all; but onemay refrain, thoughone is not obliged to do so, in casesof things which arepermitted by Islamic law. He maintained that there is ahigher level than this where the lawful is consideredfor-bidden and, therefore,asceticismbecomesobligatory.Thishigherlevel is pertainingto theSufis who becomeAbddL1’

To explain this term “abdal”, one needsto know thehierarchyof a Sufi order.The Sufi orderhas oneShelkhinthe highest rank; he is describedas Qutub (head).32TheQutubhasthreedeputies(Nuqabà’, sing. Naq?b)who repre-sentthe secondlevel.Thethird level comprisessevenchiefs(Awtad, sing. Watad).33The fourth rank includes fortysubstitutes (Abdat, sing. Baclafl.34 It is the members ofthis latter rank that A1-Ghazzaliyyhad In his mind whenhe made his commentsthat their asceticismis obligatoryin both the lawful and the forbidden. The meaningof thisis that oncea Sufi reachesthe fourth rank or higher, heregardslawful things asif they aredeadanimal.35Accordingto Islamic jurisprudence,onecaneatof adeadanimal onlyin easewhereif he did not, hewould die. ForAl-Ghazzãllyy,the deadanimal becomesa metaphorof this world, wherethe Sufi would use enough of it to subsist in order to beableto continueworshipping.

Moreover, he explained that asceticismshould take

30 A)-Ghazzaliyy, MinhaJ, p. 27.31 Ibid.. p. 42.32 Literally qutubmeanspole.33 Literally watadmeanspegor stake.34 Trlmingham,J., TheSufi Ordersin Islam (London: Oxford University

Press,1971)p. 262.35 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Minhaj. p. 42.

159

AL-GHAZZALIYY

place in regard to everything except for subsistence.Headdedthat one might subsist with or without food anddrink; if Allah wills thebody to subsistwithout a cause(i.e.,food and drink) it will do so, asdo the angels.On the otherhand,if Hewills thebody to subsistwith something,it mightbe that you seekthat thing, or that He would causethatthing to come to you without seeking it. To support hisargument,Al-Ghazzaliyycited a versein the Qur’an whichindicatesthat for onewho fearsAllah, Hewill fInd him awayout of his problems and that He will provide him withsustenancein waysthat he did not expect.36

Another obstaclethat al-Ghazzaliyy discussedis peo-ple.He heldthat peoplewill keeponefrom worshipping,andif he doesworship in their presence,he might changethewayheworships(e.g.,improveit). anactwhich rendershimhypocrite.According to Al-Ghazzãliyy, the solution to thisproblem is seclusion(at- ‘uzlah). He related numerousHa-diths, poems and anecdotesof Sufis in support of thisnotion. In addition, hedefendedtheexIstenceof Sufi schoolsand lodges (ribãtat a!-sàfiyyah)which fulfill the notion ofseclusion, even though other people are present. He main-tained that if problems arise in thesespecialgatherings.thenit is legitimatefor the scholarto seekabsoluteIsolationevenif it leadsto the “burial of knowledge”.He emphasizedthatfinding comfortin thepresenceof peoplewithout aneed(e.g., for studying) is an indication of emptiness.37

Al-Ghazzàliyydiscussedmanyother Sufi themessuchaspovertyandcelibacy.He heldthat poverty Is betterthanwealth and that celibacy is better than being preoccupiedwith the affaIrs of the wife and children. His position isbasedon the Ideathatthe Sufi shouldbe disentangledandindependentfrom worldly affairs!38

Towardsthe endof this book, he deacribedthenatureof this path that the Sufi needsto follow, saying:

‘This path in its length is unlike the existingdistancesthatpeoplecoverby feetaccordingto theirstrengthand

36 A1-Qur’an, Suraal-Tataq 65:3.seeA1-Ghazzaliyy,MirthaJ, p.43.37 Al-Ghazzaliyy, Minhaj, pp. 44-58.38 mid., p. 141.

160

AL-GHAZZALIYY’S QUESTFOR KNOWLEDGE: THE SECONDWITHDRAWAL...

weakness,it is rathera spiritual path that is treadbyheartswhich cover it with thought accordingto thefaith andinsight(of theseekers).Its origin is aHeavenlylight (rthr samawiyy) and a divine look (nazar ilãhiyy)which descendson the heartof the servantwho usesit to seethe reality of bothworlds.”39

As to the length of time one spendsin seeking thispath, A1-Ghazzáliyyarguedthat someonemight seekit fora hundredyearswithout finding it due to mistakesin theway he seeksit or becausehe doesnotexertenougheffort.On the otherhand,someoneelsemight find it in a momentwith the careof theLord, the Exalted,who is responsibleforguidance.4°

6.4 CONCLUSION

It is apparent,then, that Al-Durrah al-F’akhirah, RJãmat-‘Awãm art urn aI-Katam and Minhdj at- ‘A bid n. writtenduring the last stageof A1-Ghazzaliyy’s life, contain clearmanifestationsof his continued acceptanceof Sufism asthepath for trueknowledge.

In A1-Durrahal-Fakhirah, heheld that theSufis, whomhe describesas ‘Anfln (Gnostics),are the only peoplewhoupon their deathcould proceedthrough thesevenHeavensto reachAllah. In Iljãrn at-‘Awdm. he employedthe conceptof “common people” to divide every other kind of scholarfrom theSufis. Herankedthe Sufishigherandhe describedthem asthe scholarsof the hereafter,Finally, in Mirthhj at-‘Abidlrt, he defendedSufi schoolsand lodges. In addition,he describedthe knowledgeof the Sufi in termsof a divinelight which is typical of “unveiling” (kashjj.

All of these Sufi themes,which were also using Sufiterminology, leaveno room for any doubtor hesitationthatAl-Ghazzãliyy’s epistemologywas Sufi in its essence.Itshouldbe notedthat this is not adefenceof Sufism againsttheSatajiyyahmovementwhichtried topresentAl-Ghazzãllyyin his final daysassomeonewho abandonedSufism.What

39 Ai-Ghazzaliyy, Mtnhaj, p. 245.40 Ibid.

161

AL-GHAZZALIYY

I am trying to say is that they needa betterargumentfortheir position.

162

CONCLUSION

In this book, I haveoffered a comprehensivestudy of Al-Ghazzãliyy’sepistemologyin all his confirmedand availableworks. I havearguedthat his epistemologyevolvedthroughthe variousstagesof his life. He beganasa conformist(i.e,acceptingknowledgeon the authority of parentsandteach-ers),but soonhe brokeaway from conformismwhile still achild. He stressedthe Importanceof this step for anyoneseekingtrue knowledge. After releasing himself from theauthority of conformism, he began a long intellectualjourney in questfor truth which led him to questionevery-thing andeventuallyto experienceone of the most originalanddramaticcasesof skepticismIn he historyof thought.Thewayoutof his skepticismwasdivine illumination. Afterhe regainedhis trust In logical necessities,he studied allthe existing schoolsof thought including philosophy,dia-lectical theology and the Batinites; his searchculminatedin his acceptanceof Sufism asthe only path that leadstowhat he describedasperemptoryknowledge(‘Urn yaqn).

In ChapterOne, I presentedasketchofAJ-Ghazzallyy’slife asanaid to understandingthecomplexitiesandthe con-troversiesthat surroundthis greatMuslim thinker. Not onlyhiswritings (e.g.,Al-Ghazzaiiyy’sbookson knowledge),butalsohis life Is adirect manifestationof hisspiritual andin-teliectual development.This is especially true when thepersonis a Sufi whoseeverydaylife is a manisfestationofthe epistemologicalpath heis using.

In the subsequentChapters (2—6), 1 analyzedAl-

163

AL-CHAZZLIYY

Ghazzãliyy’sbooksinchronologicalorderin orderto portraythe developmentin his epistemology.

As a student,A1-Ghazzaliyywrote Al-Mankhülon usEdal-fiqh. His basic epistemologicalinterest in this book wasmainly asajurist. He concentratedon technical issuesthatwere part of or related to usEd al-jig It As a student. Al-Ghazzaliyy imitated his teacher al-Juwainiyy. which heacknowledgedat the endof this book. Although he differedinvery fewcasesfromhis teacherin Al-Mankhfd,hisoriginal-ity in usEd al-fiqh was manifested in his later work Al-Mustasjâ.

Although Al-Martkhid shows Al-Ghazzaliyy as animitating student, his bibliographic work A1-Munqidhmmal-Datal, which was written towards the end of his life,projectsapersonalitythat ispreoccupiedwith truth in itselfIt wasdifferencesin beliefthat promptedhim to searchfortruth. His awareness,during the early stagesof his life, ofthe different creedsof people startedhim on his first stageof a long journey of systematic skepticism which lasteduntil the climax of his questfor knowledgeduring his lastdaysasa teacherat the Nizamiyyahof Baghdad.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s critical thinking andregardfor generalquestions of truth and knowledge, while apparent in Al-Munqidh, are absentfrom Al-MankhüLThe fact that thesetwo booksreflecteddifferentareasof interestin A1-Ghazzã-liyy’s early life might appearcontradictory. One questionthat mightsurfaceasaresultof thesetwo areais: how couldsomeonelike Al-Ghazzaliyy, who was investigatingthe ge-neral notions of knowledgeand their sourcesas statedinAl-Munqkih, proceededto verily the particular as the casein Al-MankhüL

“In thebloomof mylife, from thetime I reachedpubertybeforeI wastwentyuntil now,whenlamoverfifty, I haveconstantlybeendiving daringly into the depth of thisprofoundseaandwadinginto its deepwaterlike aboldman,not like acautiouscoward.I would penetratefarintoeverymurky mystery,pounceupon everyproblem,anddashinto every mazydifficulty. I would scrutinizethecreedofeverysectandseekto laybarethesecretsofeachfaction’steachingwith the aim of discriminatingbetweenthe proponentof truth and the advocateof

164

CONCLUSION

error,andbetweenthefaithful follower of traditionandtheheterodoxinnovator.”1

Al-Ghazzàllyy reaffirmed the early beginning of thissearchfor truth andthe sourceof this questfor knowledgein the sameintroduction. He said:

“The thirst for graspingthe realmeaningof thingswasindeedmyhabitandwontfrom my earlyyearsandin theprimeofmylife, Itwasaninstinctive,naturaldispositionplaced in my makeupby God (Allah) Most High. notsomethingduetomy own choosingandcontriving.As aresult,thefettersof servileconformism(taqlid) fell awayfrom me. and inheritedbeliefs lost their hold on me,whenI wasstill quiteyoung.’2

Although theabovequotationsshowedthetime frameof thefirst line of thought,which coveredAl-Ghazzãliyy’slifeasastudent,it remainsthattherewereno bookswritten bythe studentAl-Ghazzãliyy that reflected this independentapproachto knowledgeand truth. Therewere many works(e.g.Al-Murtqidhmimi al-Dalal) by the laterAl-Ghazzaliyythatembodied this investigative course that he undertook inpursuit of knowledgeand truth in what couldbe called theareaof universals.

The second line of thought is representedin Al-Ghazzãliyy’sworks in fields likejurisprudence.Althoughthefirst line of thought must have Influenced the way Al-Ghazzàliyyapproachedareaslike fiqh by havingthat inde-pendentspirit which led him not to be a conformist topreviouswritings in suchfields, onecannotclaim thattheseworkswerereflecting the first line of thoughtbecausetheywereconcernedwith particulars.Unlike a reductionist,headdressedthese areasof particulars as if there was norelationshipbetweenthegeneralnotionsofknowledge,whichhe put underinvestigation,and theseparticular fields.

ThefactthatAl-Ghazzàliyykeptworking in theparticu-lar fields of the Shari’ah indicatethat hewasneverin doubt

i Ai-Ghazzaliyy,F)-eedomandffulflhlment(A1-Munqidhmm al-Dalad),RichardJosephMccarthy, U-. (Boston:TwaynePublishers.1980)p. 62.

2 Al-Ghazzaliyy, fl’eedom,p. 63.

165

AL-CHAZZALIYY

about the true validity of the premiseswhich were derivedfrom the Qur’an and the Sunnah. In fact, he continuedlecturingon thesesubjectsevenat theNizãmiyyahof Bagh-dad.whenhewasgoingthroughwhat I like to call theclimaxof his mentaldiscourseregardingthe first line of thought.3

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s continuousinquiry into both univer-sals and particulars is interestingbecauseon the surfacethey seemincompatible. One could seethat Al-Ghazzàliyyhadanobvious,spontaneousinterestin thefirst. It prompteda good deal of reflection throughouthis life. The difficultyis in the question: why did he pursue the second?Part

of the answer could be found in Al-Ghazzaliyy’s formaleducationwhich started with training in the particulars(e.g.flqh). Another partial answercomesfrom the fact thatthere was common interest in theseparticular sciences,especiallyin jurisprudence.In addition, Al-Ghazzaliyypur-suedhis interest in the particulars as a teacherwho wasexpected,andthusthereis asenseof duty, to lectureonsuchtopics. All of these aspectsand probably more providedthe motivation for such pursuit of knowledge in the par-ticulars. Moreover,onecould think that onceAl-Ghazzãliyyachieveduniversal knowledge, he found that his interestin the particulars was in line with his interest in theuniversals. In addition, there is a sociological element inthisequation,whereascholarin theIslamicworld is unlikelyto beacceptedwithout being deeprootedandhavingstronginterestsin the particulars.

The next stage in Al-Ghazzãliyy’s epistemologicalde-velopment took place when he becamethe teacherof theNizãmiyyah of Baghdad.His writings during this period,which lasted for a decade,reflect one of the most impor-tant stagesin his intellectual development.He broke withconformism which dominated his work as a student, andbegana systematicinquiry of the schools of thought thatwereavailableat the time in searchfor true knowledge.

Al-Ghazzaliyyencounteredmany schoolsof thought inhis quest for true knowledge.Eventually, he restricted thepossibility of finding such knowledge to four “classesof

3 A1-Ghazzaliyy.Al-Munqidh, p. 136.

166

CONCLUSION

seekers”:al-Mutakallimun., the Batinites, the philosophersandthe Sufis whosemethodologyhe finally accepted.

When Al-Ghazzaliyy becamea teacherat the Nizam-miyah of Baghdad,he startedstudying philosophy in hissearchfor true knowledgeaspart of a systematicapproachin which he wasattemptingto studyall sects,religionsandschoolsof thought in searchof true knowledge.Accordingto him, he could not find such knowledgein all the tra-ditional subjects of philosophy; the only two exceptionswere logic and mathematics.Although he was critical ofphilosophy, he adoptedmany positions from the works ofthe philosophers(e.g.,Al-Farabi).

One of the most important contributionsof Al-Ghaz-zaiiyy during this period is his position on logic. He wroteseveralbooksin which he intendedto set forth a criterionfor science.He held in Mi ‘yãr al- ‘Ilrrt that everypersonhasthree judges:a judge of sensibles,a judge of imaginationandajudge of reason.It is the addition of a “judge of imagi-nation” here that contributes to the development of hisgeneticepistemologyeventhoughhe would drop it later onin Al-Munqidh.

Al-Ghazzaliyy’s search for indubitable knowledge ledhim to reject all knowledge that was basedon authoritywhich he blamed for the differences among people. Hedefinedthis knowledgein termsof mathematicalcertitude.He scrutinizedall hiscognitionin searchfor knowledgethatwould meetthe previousdescription;hethoughtfor a whilethat the sensiblesandtheselfevidenttruths conform to thelevel of certitude that he was looking for. Nevertheless,meditating upon such knowledgehe found that he coulddoubt them, and thus he found himself devoid of anyindubitable knowledge.As aresult,hefoundhimselfdoubt-ing all sourcesof knowledge , including reason,which wasbaseduponthepossibilityof the existenceof ahigherfacultyand which he defined in terms of its relation to reason(malakahfawqaat- aql). In fact,he underwentamostgenu-ine and dramatic experienceof skepticism. This state ofdoubt continuedfor the duration of two months andeven-tually endedby divine illumination.

The first thing that Al-Ghazzáliyy regainedafter he

167

AL-GFIAZZALIYY

emergedfrom his stateof doubt was his trust in logicalnecessities.According to him, this would not have beenpossiblewithout divine illumination which he consideredasource of knowledge that he called kashf and which hedescribedas acquiring knowledgedirectly (i.e. from Allah).This latter sourceof knowledgeforms the backboneof Sufiepistemology;he would expandon this conceptduring hisfirst periodof withdrawal from public life which he believedto be a condition that he should fulfill in order to attainperemptoryknowledge.

During the years of seclusion,Al-Ghazzàliyy empha-sizedin hiswritings the limited capabilityof reasonandthat“unveiling” (kashj) is the only sourceof knowledgethat isabsolutelycapableof attaining Indubitable transcendentalknowledge.In the Ihyã’ IliUm at-Din,he stressedthesuperi-ority of Sufi knowledge over that which is attained byconventional sourcesof knowledge. This Sufi knowledgewhich he referred to as ‘tim aI-mukashafahis the aim ofintellectual activity, yet he stated that such knowledgeshould notbe revealedto the public. Therefore,the subjectof the Ihyã’ is that knowledgewhich leadsto kashf,namelythescienceofaction( 4ilmnal-mu’ãmalah).Byaction,hemeansself-mortificationand discipline which form a prerequisitefor attaining peremptory transcendentalknowledge. Inaddition, he held that kashfis possiblethrough the facultyhigher than reasonwhich forms oneof the mostimportantdevelopmentsin hisepistemology.Theaim of this positionisto show the limitations of reasonwhich cannot achieveperemptoryknowledge.This position Is reinforcedby listingprophecyasthehighestlevel in relationto theattainmentofknowledgewhich is followed by the scholarsin whatmightbe considered Al-Ghazzãliyy’s responseto the Muslimphilosopherswho ranked reason as the highest faculty.Finally, he addedin the fItyã’ anotherform for the attain-ment of peremptoryknowledge.namely,vision.

Similar to his position in the Ihyã’, Al-Ghazzãliyycon-tinued in Ai-MaqsadaI-AsnãSha.rhAsma’Allah aI-Husnãtostressthe limitationsof reasonandits incapabilityto attainperemptory transcendentalknowledge. The only way toachievesuchknowledgeis throughkashf It is obviousthat

168

CONCLUSION

thesetwo notionsareconsistentwith Al-Ghazzaliyy’sepiste-mology in the Ihya’.

As to Btdayat ai-Hidãyah, there are whole sectionswhich are identical with Qawa’td at- ‘Aqâ’id which is con-sidereda part of the Thya’ and therefore it adds to theconsistency of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s epistemology during thisperiod. In thesesectionshe assertedthenotionof disciplineandself-mortificationas prerequisitesto the attainmentofperemptoryknowledge.

In JawahtrAl-Qur’ãn whichcorrespondsto hispositionin the I1,tyã’ and Biclagat al-Htdãyah, Al-Ghazzaliyy main-tained the notion of discipline and self-mortification asconditionsfor theattainmentof transcendentalknowledge.He held that transcendentalknowledge can be revealedthroughtrue vision in metaphoricallanguage.

In Al-RIsaiah al-LadUnntygab.Al-Ghazzaliyydiscussedthe notionof “metaphysicaltranscendentalknowledge” (at-‘tim al-ghaybiyg ai-ladfznniyy) which is accessibleto eliteSufis only. This kind of knowledgecanbeattainedthroughinspiration (tlbdm).

The last book dealing with the epistemologyof Al-Ghazzaliyyduring the first periodof seclusionisMtshk&t at-Artwãr. He reiteratedhisposition regardingtheexistenceofafaculty higherthanreason.Accordingto him, eliteSufisarecapableof attaining know-ledge directly from the samesource,similar to prophets.

Although Al-Ghazzaliyy Introduces different sources(e.g., inspiration, insight) for the attainmentof knowledge,the last six booksemphasizeSufism asthe commonthemeand, therefore, this period of seclusion reflects a unifiedepistemology.

After ending his seclusionand returning to teach atthe Nizãmiyyahof Nishapur,Al-Ghazzällyymaintainedhisepistemologyas a Sufi. His last book to be written duringthis period, Al-ImId’ ft Ishkàlàt aI-Ihgã’, was written in re-sponseto the criticism that the Ihya’ had endured at thehandsof traditionalistswhomAl-Ghazzaliyydid notmentionby name.AccordingtoAl-Ghazzaliyy, theyheldthathisbookcontradicts the Shari’ah in advocating mukashafahas asourceof knowledge.His defenceof the Ihya’ Is a signof his

169

AL-C I-IAZZLIYY

commitmentto Sufism asthe only path for true knowledge.After spendingabout four yearsat the Nizamiyyah of

Nishapur,Al-Ghazzaliyywithdrewagainfrompublic life andsettled in his hometown Tus. The most important taskregardingthelastperiodof his life in relationto epistemologyis to question the claim that he abandonedSufism andadoptedthe method of the traditionalists. It is apparentthough, that Al-Durrah ai-Fãkhirah, lijam at- ‘Awam ‘an ‘Jimai-KalãmandMinhaj at- ‘Abidin, which werewritten duringthe last stageof his life, contain direct referencesto hiscontinued acceptanceof Sufism as the path for the trueknowledge.

In Ai-Durrah al-F’ãkhirah, he held that the Sufis, whomhe described as ‘Arffjtn, are the only peoplewho upon theirdeathcould proceedthrough the sevenHeavensto reachAllah. In Iijam at- ‘Awãm, he employedthe term ‘commonpeople” to distinguishevery otherkind of scholarfrom theSufis. He rankedthe Sufishigherandhe describedthem asthe scholarsof the hereafter.Finally, in Mtnh4j at- ‘Abidin,he defendedSufi schools and lodges. In addition, he de-scribedthe knowledgeof the Sufi in terms of a divine lightwhich is typical of kashf.

All of thesethemes,which werealso written usingSufiterminology, leave no room for any doubtor hesitationthatAl-Ghazzaliyy’s final epistemologywasSufi in its essence.Itshouldbe noted that this is not adefenceof Sufism againstthe traditionalistswho tried to presentAl-Ghazzaliyy in hisfinal daysas someonewho abandonedSufism. What I amtrying to say is that they needto substantiatetheir claim.

170

BIBLIOGRAPHY

This bibliography is divided into four sections. The first is achronologicallisting of Al-Ghazzaliyy’s works in Arabic that wereeithercited or consultedfor this book. The secondsectionis alistof very few translatedworks of Al-Ghazzaliyy. The third is alist ofmedievalprimarysourcesin Arabic andthefourth is agenerallistof books in Arabic andnon-Arabic languages.

WORKS BY AL-GHAZZALfl’Y

At-Mankhulruin Ta’iiqat al-Usul, ed.,MuhammadHasanHitu(Damascus:Dar al-Fikr, 1970)

__Ai-Wajiz(Al-Ghuriyyah:Matba’atHush,1318A.H./1901C.E.)Al-Wasit, ed..All Muhyi al-Din al-QarahDaghi, 2 vols. (Cairo:

Oaral-Nasr ii al-Tiba’ah al-Islamiyyah, 1984)“P’atwa”, Mu’auafatal-Ghrzzzaliyy,ed.,‘AbdurrahmanBadawi,

2nd ed. (Kuwait: Wikalat al-Matbuat, 1977)Maqasid al-Falas~fah.ed., Sulaiman Dunya (Cairo: Dar al-

Ma’arif bi-Misr, 1961)Tahufutal-Faias~[ah.ed..SuleimanDunya,7thed. (Cairo:Oar

al-Ma’arif, 1972)Mi’yar at- It tuft ai-Mantiq, ed.,Abmad Shamsal-Din (Beirut:

Oaral-Kutubal-’Ilmiyyah, 1990)Mihak at-Nazarft al-Mantiq, ed., Muhammad Badr Ad-

Din aI-Na’saniyy(Beirut: Dayal-Nahdahal-Hadithah,1966)Mizan al-’Amai, ed., SuleimanDunya (Cairo: Daral-Ma’arif

bi-Misr, 1964)Al-Iqtisadftal-Ftiqad. ed.. MuhammadMustafaAbu al-’Ula

(Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindi, 1972)“Qawa’id al-Aqa’idft alTawhid”. Majmu’at Rasa’il al-Imam

al-Ghazali,Vol. II (Beirut: Oar al-Kutub al-’llmiyyah, 1986)Ihya’ ‘Ilium al-Din, 4 Vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah, n.d.)“Jawab at-Masa’il al-Arba’ attati Sa’alaha al-Batiniyyah bi-

171

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hamadhan”, al-Manar,Xl (1908)pp. 601-608,__Al-Maqsad al-Asrta Sharh Asma Allah at-Husna, ed.,

Muhammad Mustafa Abu Al-’Ula (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindi,1968)

Bidagat al-Hidayah, ed., Muhammadal-Hajjar (Damascus:Daral-Sabuni,1986)

Jawahir al-Qur’art, ed., MuhammadMustafa Abu Al-VIa(Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindi, 1964)

“Al-Madnun bihi ala GhayriAhtih”, Majmu’at Rasa’il al-Imamal-Ghazali,Vol. IV (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 1986)

“Al-Qisto.sal-Mustaqin” . Majmu’atRasa’ll al-Irnamal-Ghazali,Vol. Ill (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 1986)

“P’aisal al-TafriqahBayrt al-Islamwaal-Zandaqah”,Majmu’atRasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali, Vol. III (Beirut: Day al-Kutb al-‘llmiyyah, 1986)

__Qanun at-Ta’wil. Publishedwith al-Ghazzaliyy’s Ma’arij al-Quds,ed., MuhammadMustafaAbu al-’Ula (Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindi, 1968)

“Ayyuhn al-Walad”. Majmu’at Rasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali,Vol. III. (Beirut: Oaral-Kutub aI-’Ilmiyyah, 1986)

Al-Tibr al-Masbukfl Nasihat al-Muluk (Cairo: Maktabatal-Kulliyat al-Azhariyyah. 1968)

“Al-Risalah al-Ladunniyyah”, Majmu’at Rasa’il al-Imam at-Ghazali,Vol. III (Beirut: Daral-Kutub aI-’llmiyyah, 1986)

MIsI-tko.t at-Anwar, ed., ‘Abd Al-’Azlz ‘Izz al-Din al-Slyarawan(Beirut: ‘Alam al-Kutub, 1986)

Al-Kashf wa al-Tabyin ft Ghurur al-khalq Ajma’in (Cairo:Matba’at MustafaMuhammad,No date).Publishedwith ‘Abdal-Wahhabal-Sha’raniyy’sTanbthaI-Mughtarrin.

A1-Munqidhattnal-Dalal, ed.,JamilSaMbaandKamil ‘Aiyyad,10thed.(No city: Daral-Andalus.1981)

Al-Mustasfaattn ‘Jim al-Usul, 2 vols. (Bulaq:Al-Matba’ahal-Amiriyyah, 1322 A. H.)

Al-Imla’ ft Mushkilat al-Ihya’, Appendix, Jhya’ ‘Ilium at-Din(Beirut: Oaral-Ma’rlfah, nd.)

At-Durrah al-Fakhirahfi Kashf ‘Ilium al-Akhirah. Publishedwith al-Ghazzaliyy’s Sir al- ‘Alamin., ed.. MuhammadMustafaAbu al-’UIa (Cairo: Maktabatal-Jlndi, 1968)

Sir al-’Alarnin wa Ko.shfma ft al-Darayn, ed., MuhammadMustafaAbuAl-’Ula (Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindl, 1968)

JIjamal-’Awarn‘an ‘Jimal-Kalam,ed.,Muhammadal-Mu’tasimBillah al-Baghdadiyy(Beirut: Oaral-Kitab al-’Arabi, 1985)

Minhajal-’Abidin, ed.,MuhammadMustafaAbual-’UIa (Cairo:Maktabatal-Jindi, 1972)

Ma’arij al-Qudsft Ma’nfat al-Nafs(Cairo: Maktabatal-Jindi,1968)

172

BIBLIOGRAPHY

TRANSLATED WORKS OF AL-GHAZZALIYY

A1-Ghazzali,TheBookOfKnowledge(Kitab at- ‘Ilm of Ihya’ ‘Ilium a.l-Din). NabihAmin Fails. ed.andtrans.(Lahore: Sh. MuhammadAshraf, 1962)

A1-Ghazali, “Fadaih al-Batiniyyah wa Facial! al-Mustazhiriyyah”.Publishedwith al-Ghazzaliyy’sFreedomandFulfillment. ed.andtrans.,RichardJ.McCarthy(Boston:TwaynePublishers,1980)

Al-Ghazali, Freedom and Fulfilment (Al-Munqidh mitt al-Dalat).RichardJosephMcCarthy,tr. (Boston:TwaynePublishers.1980)

Al-Ghazzali, Mishkatal-Anwar(TheNichefor Lights), transanded.W.H.T. Gairdner(1924,Lahore:Sh. MuhammadAshraf, 1952)

Ai-Ghazali, ThePreciousPearl(Al-Durrahal-Fakhirati) . JaneIdlemanSmith, transanded.(Missoula:ScholarsPress,1979)

Al-Ghazali, At-Qistasal-Mustaqim (TheJustBalance).trans. anded.,OP. Brewster(Lahore: Sh. MuhammadAshraf. 1978)

ARABIc pmMaY SOURCES

Ibn ‘Ajibah al-Hasaniyy,Ahmad Ibn Muhammad,Iqaz al-Htmamft Sharhal-Hikam(Cairo:Abd al-HamidAhmadHanafi, No Date)

lbn al-Jawziyy. al-Muntazamft Tarikh at-Muluk wa al-Umam(Hayderabad:Da’lrat al-Ma’arif al-Uthmaniyyah,1939)

Talbis Iblis (Beirut: Oaral-Kutub al-’llmlyyah. 1949)Ibn Kathir, At-Bidayawa al-Nthayah(Beirut: Maktabatal-Ma’arif.

nd.) vol. 12Tafsir (Beirut: Oaral-Jil. 1988)

Ibn Khaldun,Al-Muqaddimah,(Beirut: OaraI-Qalam, 1984)Ibn Khallikan, Wafayatal-A’yan waAnba’Abna’ al-Zaman,trans.

B” Mac Guckin De Slane:TheJohnJ. Burns Library. BostonCollege.ChestnutHill, MA 02167(Paris:Printed for the OrientalTranslationFundof GreatBritain And Ireland, 1843)

Ibn al-Qai3nJim,Ijtima’ al-Jugushal-Islamtyyah,‘Awwad ~Adbullthal-Mu’attaq.ed.(Riyad: Matabi’ al-Farazdaqal-TlJarlyyah, 1988)

IbnTaymiyyah,At-FurqanBaynAwtiya’ al-Rabmanwa-Awliya’ at-Shaytan(Beirut: Al-Maktabal-Islamiyy, 1981)

Naqd al-Mantiq (Cairo: Maktabat al-Sunnahal-Muham-madiyyah,1951)

Al-Maklyy, AbuTalib, Qut al-Qulub (Cairo: OarSadir, 1892)Al-Subkiyy, Taj al-Din, Tabaqatal-Shaft‘iyyah al-Kubra. ‘Abd al-

Fattah Muhammad al-Hilw and Mahmud Muhammad al-Tanahiyy, eds., (Cairo: Matba’at ‘Isa al-Babi al-Halabi & Co.,1968)

Al-’Uthman, ‘Abd al-Karim,Al-Dirasatal-Nafstyyahindal-Musliminwaal-GhazalibiWajhinKhas,2nded (Cairo:MaktabatWahbah,1981)

Ai-Zubaydiyy, Murtada, Ithaf al-Sadahal-Mutaqin bi SharhAsrarIhya’ ‘Ulum al-Din, (Beirut: Oar lhya’ al-Turathal-’Arabiyy)

173

BIBLIOGRAPHY

OTHER SOURCES

Abu Zahrah,Muhammad,Tarikh al-Madhahibal-Islamiyyah(Cairo:Oar al-Fikr al-’Arabiyy. n.d.)

Ahmed, Munir-al-din, Muslim Educationand the Scholar’sSocialStatus up to the 5thCenturyMuslimEra in theLight of ‘TarikhBaghdad”Samial-Saqqar,trans.anded (Riyad:Daral-Marrikh,1981)

Au, Abdullah Yusuf, Ma’ani al-Qur’an al-Karim (Lahore: SheikhMuhammadAshraf, 1934)

Alon, Ilai, “Al-Ghazali on Causality”, Journalof theAmericanOrien-tal Society100. 4 (1980)

Al-’Alwani, TahaJabir, Usul at-Fiqh al-Istami, eds. Yusuf TalalOeLorenzoandAS. al-Shaikh-Ali (Herndon:The InternationalInstitute of IslamicThought, 1990)

Aristotle, “MetaphysicC, The Basic Works of Aristotle, RichardMcKeon, ed (New York: RandomHouse,1941)

NicomacheanEthics, Martin Ostwald, trans. and ed.(Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merill EducationalPublishing, 1983)

Al-A’sam, ‘Abd al-Amir, Faylasuf al-Ghnzzaliyy(Beirut: Oar al-Andalus.1981)

‘Abd Al-Baqi, MuhammadFu’ad, ed,Allu’lu’ wa al-Marjan FimaIttafaqa ‘Alayhi at-Shaykhnn(No city: Oaral-Fikr, n.d.)

‘Azzam, ‘Abdallah. Fl al-JihadAdabwa-Ahkam(No City; Matbu’atal-Jihad,1987)

Badawi,‘Abdurrahman.Dawral- ‘ArabflTakwinal-Fikral-Awrubbiyy(Al-Kuwait:Wakalat aI-Matbu’at, 1979)

Mawsu’at al-Falsafah, 2 vols, (Beirut: Ai-Mu’assassahal-‘Arabiyyah Ii al-Oirasatwaal-Nashr,1984)

Mu’allafat al-Ghnzali,2nded, (Kuwait: Wikalatal-Matbu’at,1977)

Al-Bugha,Mustafa; A1-Khin, Mustafa; andal-Shurbajiyy. ‘Ali, Al-Fiqh al-Manhajiyy ‘ala Madhhabal-Imam at-Shaft’iyy (Damas-cus: Oaral-Qalam, 1989)

Descartes,DiscourcesonMethodandtheMedidations,JohnVeitch,trans.(Buffalo: PrometheusBooks. 1989)

Dimashqiyyah,‘Abd Al-Rahman, AbuHamid al-GhazzaliyyWat-Tasawwuf(Riyad:OarTibah, 1988)

AI-Ouqr, ‘Abd al-Ghaniyy, Lexicon of Arabic Grammar (MujamQawa’id At-Lughah at-‘Arabiyyah) (Damascus:Oar al-Qalam,1986)

Fakhry.Majid, A Historyof IslamicPhilosophy(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity Press,1970)

Hava,J.G.,Al-Fara’id al-Durriyyah (Beirut: Dar al-Mashriq, 1972)Hyman,Arthur andWalsh,JamesJ., eds..Philosophyin theMiddle

Ages(Indianapolis:HackettPublishingCo., 1987)James,William, “The VarietiesofReligiousExperiences”, : RalphW.

Clark, Introduction to Philosophical Thinking (St. Paul: West

174

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Publishing Co., 1987)Laoust, Henri, La Politique De Gazali (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste

Paul Geuthmer,1970)Lazarus-Yafeh.Hava,Studiesin al-Chazzali(Jerusalem:TheMagnes

Press:The HebrewUniversity, 1975)Leaman, Oliver, An Introduction to Medieval Islamic Philosophy

(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1985.Lewis, Bernard, The Political Language of Islam (Chicago: The

University of ChicagoPress,1988)Makdisi, George,“The Non-Ash’ariteShaft’ismof Ghazzali,” Reveu

desEtudesIslamiques54 (1986)Marmura,Mirchael, “GhazaliandDemonstrativeScience,”Journal

oftheHistory ofPhilosophyIII (1965)Mubarak,Zaki, Al-Akhlaq ‘md al-Ghazzaliyy(Beirut: A1-Maktabah

al-’Asriyyah, nd.)Al-NadwahaI-’AlamiyyahIi al-ShababAl-Islarniyy. Al-Mawsu’ahal-

Muyassarahft al-Adyan Wa al-Madhuhib al-Mu’asirah (Riyad:Matba’at Safir, 1989)

Al-Nadawiyy, Abu al-Hasan,F4jal al-Fikr wa al-Da’waft al-Islam,7thed. (Kuwait: Oaral-Qalam,1985)

TheNewLexiconWebster’sDictionaryoftheEnglishLanguage(NewYork: Lexicon Publications,Inc., 1989)

Al-Qardawiyy, Yusuf, Al-Imam al-GhazzaliyyBayn Madthih waNaqidih (Al-Mansurah:Oaral-Wafa’, 1988)

Kayfa Nata’amal Ma’ al-Sunnah al-Nabawuiyyah (Al-Mansurah:Oaral-Wafa’, 1990)

Rasa’illkhwanal-Safa waKhillanal-Wafa(OarBeirut:Beirut 1983)Rizvi, S. Rizwan Ali, Nizam al-Mulk Tusi (Lahore:Sh. Muhammad

Ashraf, 1978)Al-Sharbasiyy.Ahmad, al-Ghazzaliyy(Beirut: OarAl-Jil, 1975)Swarz,Merlin, “A Seventh-century(All.) Sunnicreed:The ‘Aqidah

WasitiyaofIbn Taymiya,” Hurnaniora Islamica1 (1973)Sheikh, M, Saeed,IslamicPhilosophy(London:TheOctagonPress.

1982)Al-Tahhan.Mahmud,Taysir Mustalahal-Hadith (Riyad: Maktabat

al-Ma’arif. 1981)Trimingham,J.,TheSuftOrdersinlslam(London:OxfordUniversity

Press.1971)Tuqan,Qadri Haliz, Al-ilium ‘md at-‘Arab (Beirut: OarIqra’, 1983.Al-Wakil. ‘Abd al-Rahman,HadhihiHiaal-Suftyyah(Beirut:Oaral-

Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 1984)Watt, W. Montgomery,Muslim Intellectual: A Studyof al-Ghazzali

(Edinburgh:TheEdinburghUniversity Press,1963).Wolfson, HarryA., “Nicolaus ofAutrecourtandGhazali’sArgument

Against Causality”. Speculum(1969)

175

INDEX

‘Abd Al-RahmanDimashqiyyah13

‘Aqidah29. 31,3259,95,103.121

‘Aq144.45, 52, 64, 79,97, 100,114, 130, 131

~4qliyyah79, 95, 98. 141, 146‘Ar{fun 153‘UthmanKa’ak 142Abu Hanhfah6, 7, 38, 40Ahmadlbn Nizamal-Mulk 27AhmadMuhammadShakir 29Al-Rhattab,Abu 19Al-Subklyy x, 24, 93, 152All lbn Abu Talib 8Alp Arslan 2, 10Aristotle 73, 75, 79, 80, 84, 91,

129Asha’irites5, 32, 33, 34, 69, 96,

154Babikites 10Badawlx, 62, 88, 95Barkyaruq 3.21Batinites9, 10, 20, 22, 54, 68,

89—91,99,125,141,154,163,167 SeealsoTa’limites

Batiniyyah2,9, 60, 89Bid’ah 15. 154Bouyges60, 95Brockelmann38, 72Bukhariyy29, 151Daramiyy27

Darda’, Abu 14Darurtyyat63, 138Dawuci al-Sijistaniw, Abu 30Diniyyah 146Duncan Black Macdonald 21.

22Dunya x, 34, 85Epistemology lx, 46, 53, 79, 84,

95, 96, 99, 100. 137, 138,142,146,151,158,161,164,167, 168, 169, 170

Fakhral-Mulk 4, 10. 26, 135Farabi 73, 84, 115, 116Faramdhiyy 16, 93Fath al-Hakimiyy al-Tusiyy, Abu

30, 152fiqhlx, 59, 60,61, 104,109,113,

164, 168fltral2, 117Fityan Umar lbn ‘Abd al-GhalIr

lbn Ismail aI-Khatlb al-Farisiyy, Abu 30

Hanbalites 5Hava-Lazarous Yafeh xHissiyat 138Hussaynlbn ‘All 9lbn ‘Aqil 14, 19, 33lbn ‘Arabiyy 19lbnAl-Athir 8Jimal-Akhirah 104‘flma[-Kalam35, 41,42,69,71,

151, 154, 161. 170. 118

177

INDEX

‘Ilmal-Mu’amalah 104, 133, 168‘Ilm al-Mukashafah 104, 111-

113, 115, 120, 124, 133, 168‘lim al-yakiniyy 137‘IlmYaqiniix, 137, 149Ibn 1-lajarAl-Haytamiyy 38IbnHanbal,Ahmad6,29,30,69Ibn Hazm 29, 43Ibn Jawziyy Sibt 8IbnKathir 14Ibn Khaldun4Ibn Khallikan 4, 60Ibn Sina 18, 73, 74, 75, 80, 81,

84Ibn Tashafin 4, 24Ibn Taymiyyah 32Ijma’ 148Ijtihad 41IthamSl,77, 130, 134,158,169Ilmal-Kalam35,41,69,71,118,

151, 154, 161, 170‘Isa lbn Maryam 79lsma’ilies 10Jihad13Juwainiyy 19. 39Kashf132, 141Kharazz93Khurramadinites 10Khurramites 9Ma’r~fahxMa’sum90Mahdal-Taglid 147Mahmud3Malik 6Malik Shah2Mankhul37, 38. 40, 45,50,52—

54, 55, 146, 148. 164Maqriziyy 31Minhajal-’Abidinl5l, 158, 161,

170MuhammadAl-HanalIyy. Abu 3Muhammadlbn ‘Abadallah lbn

Tumart 4Muhammad Nasir al-Oin al-

Albaniyy 29

Muhammirah 10Muhasibiyy 23Munazarah59, 60, 62, 99Muqtadi Di Amrillah 2, 4Muslim 29, 30, 152Mutakallimun2O,33,54,60,68,

69, 70, 97, 99, 121, 141,167Mutatabbib 3Mutawatir 47, 48Mysticism ix, 92,Nizamal-Mulk 3,

99

12210, 19.27,62,

Plato 73, 84, 86, 88, 114, 116,136

Qa’im Bi-Amrillah 2Qaramitah9Qarmitiyyah 9Qasim al-lsma’iliyyal-Juijaniyy,

Abu 17,93Raziyy 27Sa’id al-Naysaburiyy, Abu 8Salaftyyah3l, 32, 33, 69, 155,

161Seveners 10Shafi’iyy6, 34, 40. 113Skepticism 44, 48, 55, 59, 63,

66,67,69,76, 163, 164, 167Subkiyy xSufian al-Thawriyy 6Ta’limltes 10 See also BatinitesTaj al-Mulk al-Marzuban 3Taqfid11.46-48,56,63.77.80,

84, 96, 97, 137, 138, 147,165

Tughrul Beg 2. 5Usul al-Din 18, 102Usul al-fiqh ix, 18, 34, 38-42,

54, 55, 60, 62, 164Watt 11Yahya lbn Ma’in 29Yahya lbn Zakariyy 79Yazid Ibn Mu’awiyah 9YusuflbnTashafIn 4.24Zahirites 54Zubeida 3

178

Date post:	24-Oct-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ahmad-saifuddin-amran
View:	208 times
Download:	1 times

Al-Ghazzaliy: A Study in Islamic Epistemology.

Documents