Muhammad
al-Ghazali (450AH/1058 – 505
AH/1111 CE)
Muhammad
al-Ghazali remains one of the most celebrated scholars in the history of Islamic
thought. His exceptional life and works continue to be indispensable in the
study of jurisprudence, theology, philosophy and mysticism. The tens of books
that he left behind were the result of an inquisitive mind that began the quest
for knowledge at a very early stage. In the introduction to his autobiographical
work Deliverance from Error (Al-Munqidh
min al-Dalal, p. 81), al-Ghazali said:
“The
thirst for grasping the real meaning of things was indeed my habit and want from
my early years and in the prime of my life. It was an instinctive, natural disposition placed in my
makeup by Allah Most High, not something due to my own choosing and contriving.
As a result, the fetters of servile conformism fell away from me, and inherited
beliefs lost their hold on me, when I was quite young.”
Al-Ghazali’s
Life:
Al-Ghazali’s
full name is Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ahmad al-Tusi. He was born
in 450/1058 in Tus, Khurasan near Meshhad in present-day Iran. He bore the title
of respect Hujjat al-Islam
(Proof of Islam) for the role he played in defending Islam against the trends of
thought that existed at the time. His
father was a wool spinner (ghazzal) and thus, relative to this
profession, al-Ghazali acquired this name. (al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyyah
al-Kubra, vol. VI, pp. 191-193) Although he was born in Tus, a Persian,
non-Arabic land, Al-Ghazali wrote the overwhelming majority of his works in
Arabic, the lingua franca
of his world.
Before
his death, al-Ghazali’s father entrusted him and his brother Ahmad to a Sufi
friend. He asked him to spend whatever little money he left behind, to teach
them reading and writing. When the money was finished, the Sufi asked them to
join a school so that they might subsist. According to Al-Subki (Tabaqat,
vol. VI, p.195), schools used to provide room, board and stipend.
Al-Ghazali
began studying at Tus where his teacher was Ahmad Al- Radhakani. His next
station was Jurjan where he wrote Al-Ta`liqah
from the lectures of Abu Al-Qasim Al-Isma`ili Al-Jurjani. He returned to Tus for
three years only to leave afterwards for Nishapur, where he joined the
Nizamiyyah school and studied under Imam Al-Haramayn Al-Juwaini for eight years
until the death of his teacher in 478 AH / 1085 CE. (Al-Subki, Tabaqat,
vol. VI, pp. 195-196) During this period al-Ghazali excelled in all the Islamic
sciences with the exception of the science of the Hadith; he confessed this in
the last paragraph of his work Qanun
al-Ta’wil (The Law
of Metaphorical Exegesis). This may have been the reason for the presence of
some unsound traditions in his works, such as the famous Ihya’ `Ulum
al-Din (The
Revival of the Islamic Sciences).
After
the death of Al-Juwaini, al-Ghazali went to the Camp (Al-Mu`askar) of
vizier Nizam Al-Mulk who founded the Nizamiyyah schools. The Camp was reputed as
a meeting place for scholars who debated in the Islamic sciences. al-Ghazali won
the respect of other scholars and was assigned by Nizam Al-Mulk to be the
teacher at the Nizamiyyah of Baghdad. He lectured there between 484 AH / 1091 CE
and 488 AH / 1095 CE. (Al-Subki, Tabaqat,
vol. VI, pp. 196-197)
This position won him prestige, wealth and respect that even princes, kings and
viziers could not match. (Al-Zubaydi, Ithaf,
vol. I, p.7)
During
this period, al-Ghazali studied philosophy on his own and wrote Maqasid al-Falasifah
(The
Aims of the Philosophers)
and appeared as if he was one of them. His critique of philosophy followed, in a
book he called Tahafut
Al-Falasifah (The
Incoherence of the Philosophers).
Almost all scholars tend to generalize and say that al-Ghazali gave a coup de
grace to philosophy in this book. Indeed, few notice that he was critical of
Greek metaphysics and its spread in an “Islamic” dress at the hands of
reputed Muslim philosophers such as Ibn Sina and Al-Farabi. A detailed
discussion of al-Ghazali’s relationship with philosophy and science will
follow.
The
end of al-Ghazali’s career at the Nizamiyyah of Baghdad was unexpected. The
circumstances surrounding this event became known as the “Spiritual Crisis”
of al-Ghazali. He discussed the reason that prompted him to quit his position in
Deliverance
from Error. After
discussing the methodologies of the Muslim theologians (Al-Mutakallimun),
the philosophers and the esoterics (Al-Batiniyyah),
he chose the Sufi path as the way to acquire indubitable knowledge. He noted
though that this method has prerequisites; one should abandon all worldly
attachments. Al-Ghazali thought that, in order to implement this, he should
“shun fame, money and to run away from obstacles.” (Al-Munqidh, p.
134) He made it clear that any deed
that was not for the sake of Allah was an obstacle. Upon scrutinizing his
activities, he decided that his motivation for teaching was not for the sake of
Allah. (Al-Munqidh, p. 134) Of this al-Ghazali said:
“For
nearly six months beginning with Rajab, 488 AH [July, 1095 CE], I was
continuously tossed about between the attractions of worldly desires and the
impulses towards eternal life. In that month the matter ceased to be one of
choice and became one of compulsion. (Allah) caused my tongue to dry up so that
I was prevented from lecturing. One particular day I would make an effort to
lecture in order to gratify the hearts of my following, but my tongue would not
utter a single word nor could I accomplish anything at all.” (Hayman and
Walsh, eds., Philosophy
in the Middle Ages,
p. 277)
Al-Ghazali’s
health deteriorated and the physicians gave up any hope for they realized that
the source of his problem was not physical. He “sought refuge with Allah who
made it easy for his heart to turn away from position and wealth, from children
and friends.” (Hayman and Walsh, p.278) He distributed his wealth and departed
from Baghdad to begin a spiritual journey that lasted for about eleven years. He
went to Damascus, Jerusalem, Hebron, Madinah, Makkah and back to Baghdad where
he stopped briefly. This part of the journey lasted until Jumada Al-Akhirah, 490
AH / June,1097 CE. He continued to Tus to spend the next nine years in seclusion
(Khalwa).
He ended his seclusion to teach for a short period at the Nizamiyyah of
Nishapur in 499 AH / 1106 CE. From there he returned to Tus where he remained
until his death in Jumada Al-Akhirah, 505 AH / December,1111 CE. (Abu Sway, M., al-Ghazali:
A Study in Islamic Epistemology, p. 24)
Yet,
before delving into al-Ghazali’s ideas, it is important to remember that he
lived in what might be described as a post-golden age context. The production of
the exact sciences faded away, the Islamic state had grown into a massive
caliphate that faced disintegration as the provincial governors gained power.
Just before al-Ghazali was born, the institution of the Sultan was introduced or
rather forced on Baghdad. The year 450 AH marked the first time a split in power
took place between the Sultan, who was the actual ruler, and the Caliph whose
role was reduced to dignitary functions. (Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah,
vol. XII, p. 66)
It
was a classical case of a wealthy and powerful civilization that lost track of
its sense of direction and lost sight of its roots, its source of power. The
indulgence in material life had led many celebrities to abandon public life and
to live in seclusion. It was a search for a meaning of life in asceticism.
Sufism thrived before al-Ghazali was born and he ultimately subscribed to the
mystics’ path.
Al-Ghazali’s
Thought:
Al-Ghazali
was an encyclopedic and prolific scholar. He was trained as a jurist in the
Shafi`i school which is traditionally Ash`arite in its expression of Islamic
faith. He contributed many books to these fields. In addition, he wrote
extensively about Islamic mysticism. He wrote about politics and the sects of
the time, and he wrote poetry. Yet, in what follows, the discussion will be
restricted to his position on science.
The
early works of al-Ghazali were in the area of jurisprudence. Nevertheless, in Al-Mankhul
fi `Ilm al-Usul, a book on usul al-fiqh. He devoted a chapter to a
discussion of the nature of the sciences (al-kalam fi haqa’iq al-`ulum).
It should be noted that al-Ghazali’s use of the word “sciences” is general
and restricted to the natural or physical sciences; it covers all subjects of
knowledge including those of the Shari`ah.
This chapter included important insights reflecting his position
regarding science. One of these insights was regarding the definition of `ilm
[science]. He said:
“science cannot be defined” (inna al-`ilma la hadda lah). He
explained his statement by saying that it was possible to know science and that
“our inability to define (science) does not indicate our ignorance about the
same science”. (Al-Mankhul, p. 42)
Al-Ghazali
divided the sciences or knowledge into eternal and accidental. Eternal knowledge
belongs to God alone. He divided accidental knowledge into immediate (hajmiyy)
and theoretical (nazariyy). The
first is the kind of knowledge that one has to know with the beginning of
reason, such as the existence of the self. On the other hand, theoretical
knowledge is the result of sound thinking (al-nazar al-sahih). Related to
this is al-Ghazali’s definition of reason. He said that it is “the
qualification which enables the qualified [person] to perceive knowledge and to
think about the cognizable.” (Al-Mankhul, pp. 44-45)
While
al-Ghazali classified the senses into different categories in terms of their
function in acquiring knowledge, he maintained that there were no differences
between the sciences once knowledge is acquired, regardless of how difficult the
subject of the science is. This
view of al-Ghazali regarding the equality of the sciences, once they are
achieved, is consistent with his position regarding his interchangeable use of
the terms “science” and “knowledge”.
(Al-Mankhul, p. 48)
The
first period of public teaching at the Nizamiyyah of Baghdad (478-488
AH/1085-1095 CE) was the time when al-Ghazali encountered philosophy.
In Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal, a biographic work that he wrote
towards the end of his life, he sketched his quest for knowledge. Al-Ghazali
reduced the list of the seekers for knowledge to four groups: the dialectical
theologians (Al-Mutakallimun), the esoterics (al-Batiniyyah), the
philosophers, and the Sufis (Al-Munqidh, p. 89).
His discussion of philosophy is the most relevant to his position on
science.
Al-Ghazali
stated that in his quest for true knowledge he started studying philosophy after
he was done with `ilm al-kalam, which did not provide “certain
knowledge” (`ilm al-yaqin) he sought. In his introduction to the
section on philosophy he outlined his approach to this new field. He wanted to
pursue philosophy to a level higher than that of the most knowledgeable in the
field. Only then, he argued, could one know the intricate depths of the science,
as he referred to philosophy. (Al-Munqidh, p. 94)
Al-Ghazali
was aware that he could not rely on secondary sources, such as those of the Mutakallimun,
in order to study philosophy. For
him, their books included fragmented philosophical words that were complex and
contradictory to one another. Instead,
he decided to read books of philosophy directly without the assistance of a
teacher. Although he was teaching three hundred students at the Nizamiyyah of
Baghdad and writing on the Islamic revealed sciences at the same time, in his
spare time he was able to master philosophy in less than two years. He spent
almost another year reflecting on it. (Freedom and Fulfillment, p. 70)
al-Ghazali wanted the readers, through such a detailed account of his effort, to
have confidence that he had a thorough grasp of philosophy and that his
conclusions are trustworthy.
As
a result of his study he wrote two books: Maqasid al-Falasifah (The
Aims of the Philosophers)
and
Tahafut
al-Falasifah (The
Incoherence of the Philosophers).
It was al-Ghazali’s intention to write a book that would encompass the
thought of the philosophers without criticizing or adding anything to it. Of
this objective, he said:
“I
thought that I should introduce, prior to the Tahafut,
a concise account that will include the story of their aims (maqasid)
which will be derived from their logical, natural and metaphysical sciences,
without distinguishing between what is right and what is wrong, without
additions and along with that they believed what they believed as their
proofs.” (Maqasid,
p. 31)
This
book, which is a pioneer work in its attempt to deliberately present an
objective account of the thought of adversaries, was followed by the Tahafut,
which included his critique of the contents of the first one. It was this latter
work (i.e. Tahafut al-Falasifah) that prompted Ibn Rushd to write Tahafut
al-Tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence) which constituted a
systematic rebuttal of al-Ghazali’s critique of this mélange of Greco-Islamic
philosophy.
In
Maqasid al-Falasifah, al-Ghazali divided the sciences of the philosophers
into four major categories: mathematical (al-riyadiyyat), logical (al-mantiqiyyat),
natural (al-tabi`iyyat) and metaphysical (al-ilahiyyat). (Maqasid,
p. 31) He listed politics, economy
and ethics as subdivisions under metaphysics. In al-Munqidh min al-Dalal,
he listed politics and ethics as major sections along with the first four. (al-Munqidh, p. 100) Only mathematics and logic will be discussed
here.
Regarding
mathematics, al-Ghazali thought that it dealt with geometry and arithmetic.
Neither of these subjects contradicted reason.
As a result, he did not think that he ought to include a detailed account
of mathematics in his book. (Maqasid,
pp. 31-32)
Knowledge
is divided, in the second section of the book of knowledge of Ihya’ `Ulum
al-Din, into `ulum shar`iyyah (sciences of the
Shari`ah) and ghayr-shar`iyyah
(non-Shari`ah
sciences). To the latter belongs mathematics and medicine, which al-Ghazali
described as praiseworthy sciences. The
latter sciences are considered fard kifayah
(i.e. there should be enough Muslims who are experts in the concerned field to
the degree that they can fulfill the needs of the Islamic society).
Nevertheless, al-Ghazali criticized unnecessary studies in mathematics that do
not have practical applications. (Ihya’, pp. 16-17)
The
fact that al-Ghazali categorized mathematics and medicine as fard kifayah
is a positive position. This means that the society at large would be committing
a sin if they neglect any of these sciences to the degree the shortage would
have negative impact on the society. In fact, he blamed the students of
jurisprudence for their indulgence in minute details of the Shari`ah. The
context indicates that they better study medicine instead of specializing in
issues in jurisprudence that might never prove to be of any benefit. (Ihya’,
vol. I, p. 21) Despite this positive stance, al-Ghazali did not remain
consistent in his position.
Al-Ghazali
had fears that though geometry and arithmetic are permissible, they might lead a
person to blameworthy sciences. (Ihya’, vol. I, p.22) He did not
discuss the reasons that led him to take such a position. It should be noted
that this remark is atypical for al-Ghazali and does not reflect his general
position regarding arithmetic, geometry and the exact sciences. The context
itself might provide some insight as to why al-Ghazali was cautious in dealing
with mathematics and the exact sciences. During
his time, there were no compartmentalized studies, and every student learned all
branches of knowledge. Al-Ghazali was afraid that a student might be deceived by
the accuracy of mathematics and then generalize and consider all the subjects
included in philosophy, including metaphysics, to be as accurate.
In
al-Mustasfa
min `Ilm al-Usul,
al-Ghazali stated that arithmetic and geometry are pure rational sciences that
are not recommended for studying. They fluctuate between false, yet plausible
guesses, and true knowledge that yields no practical applications. (Al-Mustasfa,
p. 3) This shift from his early
position that studying mathematics is fard
`ayn might be
attributed to his acceptance of the Sufi path. Al-Mustasfa was
written towards the end of al-Ghazali’s life when he was deeply absorbed by tasawwuf.
Al-Ghazali
did not see any practical application for the study of physics, and thus
declared it useless. He knew that physics is concerned with substances and their
properties, yet he stated that some of the input of the philosophers
contradicted the Shari`ah. (The Book of knowledge, p. 54) Thus practical
application, or rather the lack of it, caused al-Ghazali to reject a particular
science as the above example, or at least criticize it (Ihya’, pp.
16-17). This position should be seen in the context of the civilizational
development of the 5th century AH/ 11th century CE.
Regarding
logic, he defined it as “the law (qanun) that distinguishes a sound
premise and analogy from a false one, which leads to the discernment of true
knowledge.” (Maqasid, p. 36) In reviewing the subjects of logic, which
he believed to be neutral in its relationship with the Shari`ah, (al-Munqidh, p. 103) al-Ghazali stated that induction (istiqra’)
could be correct only if all parts were covered. If only one part could be different, then induction in this
case could not yield true knowledge.
Al-Ghazali
criticized the philosophers on twenty accounts in the Tahafut.
Of relevance to the discussion here is his position on issue number
seventeen, causality. Long before David Hume, al-Ghazali said that, in his
opinion, “the conjunction (al-‘qtiran) between what is conceived by
way of habit (fi al`adah) as cause and effect is not necessary (laysa
daruriyyan).” He provided a list of pairs that were usually thought of as
cause and effect by the philosophers (e.g. fire and burning, light and sunrise,
diarrhea and laxatives). For him, the conjunction between them was a result of
the sequence in which Allah created them, not because this conjunction was
necessary in itself. Moreover, he thought that it was possible for one of these
pairs to exist without the other. He did not see any contradiction since these
pairs are the phenomena of nature and nature as such, according to the
philosophers own admission, does not belong to the realm of necessity but that
of possibility, which may or may not exist. (Tahafut, p. 239)
Al-Ghazali
criticized the philosophers’ proof of causality because it was limited to
observation (mushahadah) which depends on the senses, a source of
knowledge that he could not accept on its own merit. Thus his position regarding
causality is consistent with his theory of knowledge. Using the example of fire
and burning, he said that “observation could only prove that burning took
place when there was fire, and not by the fire.” He held that inert and lifeless objects such as fire are
incapable of action and thus cannot be the agent (al-fa`il) that causes
burning. To prove his point, al-Ghazali used a proof, which is neo-platonic in
its tone, from the arguments of the philosophers. They held that accidents (a`rad) and incidents (hawadith)
emanate at the time of contact between “bodies”, from the provider of forms
(wahib al-suwar) whom they thought to be an angel. Accordingly, one
cannot claim that fire is the agent of burning.
In addition, he argued that the agent “creates” burning with his will
(bi’iradatihi). al-Ghazali reduced the problem of causality to that of
“will” which makes it rationally possible for the agent, whom he held to be
Allah, not to create burning even though there is contact. (Tahafut, pp.
242-243)
Al-Ghazali
presented this theory of causality in order to allow room for the existence of
miracles (mu`jizat) that were associated with the prophets, without
resorting to allegorical interpretations as the philosophers did. One of the
miracles that he chose as an example was that of Prophet Ibrahim. The story was
that his people attempted to burn him for breaking their idols by throwing him
into fire but no burning took place. In the Qur’an (21:69) it was Allah’s
will that the fire would not harm Ibrahim.
al-Ghazali maintained that Allah was the agent (fa`il) of every
action, either directly or indirectly (i.e. by the angels). (Tahafut, pp.
243-247)
Al-Ghazali
knew that he could not exhaust all the sciences in his writings. He had an
insight that there are more sciences within reach of human beings. He said:
“It appeared to me through clear insight and beyond doubt, that man is capable
of acquiring several sciences that are still latent and not existent.” (Jawahir
al-Qur’an, p. 28)
Al-Ghazali’s
Impact on Islamic Thought and Beyond:
Al-Ghazali’s
status in Islamic thought ranges from being the “Proof of Islam” and renewer
(mujadded) of the fifth century AH, to being declared a non-believer by
some of our contemporary “scholars” (Dimashqiyyah, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali wal-Tasawwuf).
The unfortunate gap between the two positions reflects the war that ensued
between the Sufis and the Salafis,
a war that is almost as old as Islam itself. Al-Ghazali left behind a great
number of books and treatises. According to Abdurrahman Badawi (Mu’allafat
al-Ghazali) seventy-three are definitely his.
One of the most celebrated books is the Ihya’ `Ulum Al-Din (Revival
of Islamic Sciences).
al-Ghazali believed that Muslims became entrapped within the minute details of fiqh.
This included scholars as well because to a certain extent they had lost sight
of the original message of Islam. It is in this context that the Ihya’
poses a challenge to scholars, despite its own flaws that mostly arise from
al-Ghazali’s lacked of sufficient knowledge in the science of Hadith,
as he admitted in Qanun al-Ta’wil. Al-Subki, an early historian of the
Shafi`i school of jurisprudence, listed in
Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyyah
al-Kubra more than
nine hundred weak or forged traditions that he detected in the Ihya’.
Al-Ghazali
was the scholar per excellence in the Islamic world. He had literally hundreds
of scholars attending his lectures at the Nizamiyyah school of Baghdad. His
audience included scholars from other schools of jurisprudence. The list
includes Judge Abu Bakr Ibn Al-`Arabi who was Maliki, Al-Khattabi and Abu Al-Wafa’
Ibn `Aqil who were Hanbalites.
Reflecting
the influence of al-Ghazali on the Latin world, Manuel Alonso listed forty-four
medieval philosophers and theologians who made reference to al-Ghazali. This
included Thomas Aquinas who referred to Maqasid Al-Falasifah thirty-one
times (Al-Andalus,
XXIII). Needless to say, that al-Ghazali is still celebrated in many academic
institutions in the West, with numerous orientalists writing about him and
translating his books. `Uthman Ka`ak has related that he found a translated copy
of Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal in Descartes’ library in Paris with
Descartes’ comments in the margin. The numerous similarities between Al-Munqidh
and Discourse on Method
support Ka`ak’s
observations. Ka`ak passed away and I have attempted to locate the book that he
mentioned by corresponding with several libraries in France that contain some of
Descartes’ book collection, yet to no avail.
Conclusion:
Al-Ghazali
rejected conformism or uncritical acceptance of any set of thought including
that of the Shari’ah. He sketched his quest for peremptory knowledge (i.e. `ilm
al-yaqin) and the ordeal he had to go through in order to achieve it. He
reviewed the position of many Islamic groups and others who claimed to be the
gate to the knowledge that he sought. His position regarding the sciences
slightly differed from one to the other, and from time to time. A science, to be
sought, has to be in conformity with the Shari`ah, and has to have practical
applications which should prove to be beneficial to the society. It is apparent
that by subscribing to the Sufi path, al-Ghazali detached himself from the
material world including the exact sciences, which lost whatever status they
held in his eyes at one point. Al-Ghazali had a great spirit that roamed and
wandered in search of truth. Though originally his search was not in the area of
science per se, inculcating such a spirit might be a step in the right direction
to scientific inquiry. I began this entry with a quotation from al-Ghazali and I
would like to conclude with one that reflects this spirit and leave it open
ended, he said:
“In
the bloom of my life, from the time I reached puberty before I was twenty until
now, when I am over fifty, I have constantly been diving daringly into the depth
of this profound sea and wading into its deep water like a bold man, not like a
cautious coward. I would penetrate
far into every mazy difficulty. I
would scrutinize …!” (Freedom and Fulfillment, p. 62)
Mustafa
Abu Sway
Bibliography
(Partial List)
Major
works by al-Ghazali arranged in chronological order:
-----,
Al-Mankhul min Ta`liqat al-Usul, ed., Muhammad Hasan Hitu (Damascus:
Dar Al-Fikr, 1970)
-----,
Al-Wajiz
(Al-Ghuriyya: Matba`at
Hush, 1318 AH [1901 CE])
-----,
Al-Wasit,
ed., Ali Muhyi al-Din al-Qarah Daghi, 2 vols. (Cairo: Dar al-Nasr
li al-Tiba`ah al-Islamiyyah, 1984)
-----, Fatawa, ed., Mustafa Abu Sway (Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1996)
-----,
Maqasid
al-Falasifah, ed.,
Suleiman Dunya (Cairo: Dar al-Ma`arif bi-Misr,
1961)
-----,
Tahafut
al-Falasifah, ed.,
Suleiman Dunya, 7th ed. (Cairo: Dar al-Ma`arif
bi- Misr, 1961)
-----,
Mi`yar
al-`Ilm fi al-Mantiq,
ed., Ahmad Shams al-Din (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub
al-`Ilmiyyah, 1990)
-----,
Mihak
al-Nazar fi al-Mantiq,
ed., Muhammad Badr Ad-Din al-Na`sani
(Beirut: Dar al-Nahdah al-Hadithah, 1966)
-----,
Mizan
al-`Amal, ed.,
Suleiman Dunya (Cairo: Dar al-Ma`arif bi-Misr, 1964)
-----,
Al-Iqtisad
fi Al-I`tiqad, ed.,
Muhammad Mustafa Abu al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat
al-Jindi, 1972)
-----,
Ihya’
`Ulum al-Din, 4 Vols.
(Beirut: Dar al-Ma`rifah, n.d.)
-----,
Al-Maqsad al-Asna Sharh Asma’ Allah al-Husna, ed., Muhammad Mustafa
Abu al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindi, 1968)
-----,
Bidayat
al-Hidayah, ed.
Muhammad al-Hajjar (Damascus: Dar al-Sabuni,
1986)
-----,
Jawahir
al-Qur’an, ed.,
Muhammad Mustafa Abu al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat
al-Jindi, 1964)
-----,
“Al-Madnun
bihi `ala Ghayri Ahlih”,
Majmu`at Rasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali,
vol. IV (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, 1986)
-----,
“Al-Qistas
al-Mustaqim”
Majmu`at Rasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali,
vol. III (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, 1986)
-----,
“Faisal al-Tafriqah bayn al-Islam wa al-Zandaqah” Majmu`at Rasa’il
al-Imam al-Ghazali, vol. III (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah,1986)
-----,
Qanun
al-Ta’wil. Published
with al-Ghazali’s Ma`arij
al-Quds, ed., Muhammad
Mustafa Abu al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindi, 1968)
------“Ayyuha
al-Walad” Majmu`at
Rasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali, vol. III (Beirut:
Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, 1986)
-----,
Al-Tibr
al-Masbuk fi Nsiyat al-Muluk (Cairo:
Maktabat al-Kulliyyah al-Azhariyyah)
-----,
“Al-Risalah
al-Ladunniyyah”,
Majmu`at Rasa’il al-Imam al-Ghazali,
vol. III (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, 1986)
-----,
Mishkat
al-Anwar, ed., `Abd
Al-`Aziz `Izz al-Din al-Siyarawan (Beirut:
`Alam al-Kutub, 1986)
-----,
Al-Kashf wa al-Tabyin fi Ghurur al-Khalq Ajma`in (Cairo: Matba`at Mustafa
Muhammad, n.d.) Published with `Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha`rani’s
Tanbih al-Mughtarrin.
-----,
Al-Munqidh
min al-Dalal, eds.,
Jamil Saliba and Kamil `Aiyyad, 10th
ed. (Beirut: Dar al-Andalus, 1981)
-----,
Al-Mustasfa
min `Ilm al-Usul, 2
vols. (Bulaq: Al-Matba’ah al-Amiriyyah,
1322 A.H.)
-----,
Al-Imla’
fi Mushkilat al-Ihya’,
Appendix, Iyha’ `Ulum al-Din (Beirut:
Dar al-Ma`rifah, n.d.)
-----,
Al-Durrah al-Fakhirah fi Kashf `Ulum al-Akhirah. Published with al-Ghazali’s
Sir al-`Alamin,
ed., Muhammad Mustafa Abu al-`Ula (Cairo:
Maktabat al-Jindi, 1968)
-----,
Sir al-`Alamin wa Kashf ma fi al-Daryn, ed., Muhammad Mustafa Abu
al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindi, 1968)
-----,
Iljam
al-`Awam `an `Ilm al-Kalam,
ed., Muhammad al-Musta`sim Billah
al-Baghdadi (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-`Arabi, 1985)
-----,
Minhaj
al-`Abidin, ed.,
Muhammad Mustafa Abu al-`Ula (Cairo: Maktabat
al-Jindi, 1968)
-----,
Ma`arij
al-Quds fi Ma`rifat al-Nafs
(Cairo: Maktabat al-Jindi, 1968)
Translated
Works of al-Ghazali
1.
al-Ghazali, The Book of Knowledge (Kitab
al-`Ilm of Ihya` `Ulum al-Din)
ed. and trans., Nabih Amin Faris (Lahore; Sh. Muhammad Ashraf,
1962)
2.-----,
On
the Duties of Brotherhood.
trans. Muhtar Holland (Woodstock, NewYork: The Overlook Press, 1976)
3.-----,
Freedon and Fulfillment (Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal), Published with
al-Ghazali’s “Fada’ih al-Batiniyyah wa Fada’il
al-Mustazhiriyyah”.
ed. and trans., Richard J. McCarthy (Boston: Twayn Publishers, 1980)
4.-----,
Inner Dimensions of Islamic Worship (from Ihya’ `Ulum al-Din)
trans., Muhtar Holland (Leicester: The Islamic Foundation, 1983)
5.-----,
The Just Balance (Al-Qistas al-Mustaqim), trans. and ed., D.P.
Brewster (Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1978)
6.-----,
The
Niche for Lights (Mishkat
al-Anwar), trans. and
ed., W.H.T. Gairdner (Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1952)
7.-----,
The Ninety-Nine Beautiful Names of God (Al-Maqsad al-Asna Sharh Asma’ Allah
Al-Husna) trans.,
David B. Burrell and Nazih Daher
(Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 1992)
8.-----,
The Precious Pearl (Al-Durrah al-Fakhirah), trans. and ed., Jane Idleman
Smith (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979)
9.-----,
Letters,
trans., Abdul Qayyum (Lahore: Islamic Publications, 1976)
Other
Works:
Abu
Sway, Mustafa, al-Ghazali: A Study in Islamic Epistemology (Kuala Lumpur,
Dewan Bahasa Dan Pustaka, 1996)
Al-A`sam,
`Abd al-Amir, Al-Faylasuf al-Ghazali
(Beirut: Dar al-Andalus, 1981)
Badawi,
`Abdurrahman, Mu’allafat al-Ghazali,
2nd ed. (Kuwait: Wakalat al-Matbu`at, 1977)
Laoust,
Henri, La
Politique De Gazali (Paris:
Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthmer,
1970)
Al-Qaradawi,
Yusuf, Al-Imam al-Ghazali bayn Madihih wa Naqidih (Al-Mansurah: Dar al-Wafa’,
1990)
Al-Sharabasi,
Ahmad, al-Ghazali
(Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1975)
Al-`Uthman,
`Abd al-Karim, Al-Dirasat al-Nafsiyyah `ind al-Muslimin wa al-Ghazali bi Wajhin Khas,
2nd ed. (Cairo: Maktabat Wahbah, 1981)
Watt,
W. Montgomery, Muslim Intellectual: A Study of al-Ghazali (Edinburgh: The Edinburgh University Press, 1963)
Zaki,
Mubarak, Al-Akhlaq
`ind al-Ghazali
(Beirut: Al-Maktabah al-`Asriyyah, n.d.)
Al-Zubaydiyy,
Murtada, Ithaf al-Sadah al-Muttaqin bi Sharh Asrar Ihya’
`Ulum al-Din
(Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-`Arabi, n.d.)
back to the list of entries (g)