Al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s Philosophical
Download 4.03 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
|
in this
book .
19. For the critique, see al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Munqidh , 18–20; for slightly more apprecia- tive comments, see ibid. 25–27. 20. Elsewhere I dealt with the subject of prophecy; see my “Al-G . aza¯lı¯’s Concept of Prophecy: The Introduction of Avicennan Psychology into Aš ¶arite Theology.” On this subject, see also al-Akiti, “The Three Properties of Prophethood in Certain Works of Avicenna and al-G . aza¯lı¯”; and Davidson, Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes, on Intellect , 129–44, 149–55. For a study of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s treatment of the soul in his Ih.ya¯ 7 , see Gian- otti, Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ ’ s Unspeakable Doctrine of the Soul . 21. See pp. 44 , 47 in this book . 22. Frank, Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ and the Ash ¶arite School , 4, 29, 87, 91. Ansari, “The Doctrine of Divine Command,” offers the most thorough expression of the opposite view, that is, that of a gradual development in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s thought from his works of kala¯m ( al-Iqtis.
ticsm in his Mishka¯t al-anwa¯r . 23. See p. 52 in this book . 24. See p. 67. 25. Al-Iqtis.a¯d f ı¯ l-i ¶tiqa¯d is the “right balance” in terms of the teachings presented therein (see Makdisi, “Non-Ash ¶arite Shafi ¶ism,” 249–50) and also the “balanced middle” with regard to the depth in which it discusses its subject matter (see al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Ih.ya¯ 7 1:134.13–16 / 169.16–19; idem, al-Iqtis.a¯d , 215.9–10; and Frank, Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ and the Ash ¶arite School , 71). 26. Watt, “A Forgery in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s Mishka¯t? ” and “The Authenticity of Works Ascribed to al-Ghaza¯lı¯,” 40–42. For a proper discussion and refutation of Watt’s sug- gestion that the third part of Mishka¯t al-anwa¯r is a forgery, see Landolt, “Ghaza¯lı¯ and ‘Religionswissenschaft,’ ” 21–29, 62–68. 27. Rosenthal, The Technique and Approach of Muslim Scholarship , 22–27. 28. Lazarus-Yafeh, Studies in al-Ghazzali , 249–63. 29. Frank, Creation and the Cosmic System , 59; idem, Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ and the Ash ¶arite School , 20. 30. In classical Ash ¶arism, the miracle is the only way the claims of a true prophet can be distinguished from those of an imposter (see Griffel, “Al-G . aza¯lı¯’s Concept of Prophecy,” 101–4). The authority of revelation thus rests on God’s performance of pro- phetical miracles. 2 8 8 not e s to page s 6 – 1 0 31. For a comprehensive report of Frank’s and Marmura’s interpretations, see pp. 179–82 in this book. 32. Or, as the physicist Steven Weinberg, The First Three Minutes , 154, puts it: “It is almost irresistible for humans to believe that we have some special relation to the uni- verse, that human life is not just a more-or-less farcical outcome of a chain of accidents reaching back to the fi rst three minutes, but that we were somehow built in from the beginning.” 33. For an explanation of this cosmology, see below, pp. 253–60 . 34. Recently, Nas.rulla¯h Pu¯rjava¯dı¯ discovered a text, al-Kita¯b al-Mad.nu¯n bihi ¶ala¯
presented as being those of himself; see Majmu¯ ¶ah-yi falsaf ı¯-yi Mara¯gha / A Philosophical Anthology from Maragha , 1–62. The same manuscript (pp. 191–224) also contains one of the numerous versions of Nafkh al-ru¯h. wa-l-taswiya / al-Mad.nu¯n al-s.aghı¯r , and the Risa¯la Fı¯ ¶ilm al-ladunı¯ (pp. 100–120). For the latter, see also the edition of the text from MS Istanbul, Hamidiye 1452, foll. 7b–19b, in ¶A ¯ s.ı¯, al-Tafsı¯r al-Qur 7a¯nı¯ wa-l-lugha al-s.u¯fi yya , 182–202. 35. On some occasions I refer in the footnotes to al-Ghaza¯lı¯ (?) Ma ¶a¯rij al-quds
Ghaza¯lı¯. The text, however, is very useful, as it explains the background of a number of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s teachings that appear in his generally accepted works. The work is doubt- less of Ghazalian character; see Griffel, “Al-G . aza¯lı¯’s Concept of Prophecy,” 139–42; and al-Akiti, “Three Properties of Prophethood,” 196–208. It is also of distinctly Avicennan character; see Janssens, “Le Ma ¶ârij al-quds fî madârij ma ¶rifat al-nafs: un élément-clé pour le dossier Ghazzâlî-Ibn Sînâ?” Future studies must decide whether it can be truly ascribed to al-Ghaza¯lı¯. Some of its teachings, such as the notion that God creates with- out a goal ( gharad. ; Ma ¶a¯rij al-quds , 196.12–13) were held by Ibn Sı¯na¯ but were rejected by al-Ghaza¯lı¯ in the works that are generally ascribed to him and that are the basis of this study. Yet some classical Muslim scholars such as Ibn Sab ¶ı¯n (d. c . 668/1269–70) in his Budd al- ¶a¯rif , 144. ult .–145.4, ascribed the Ma ¶a¯rij al-quds to al-Ghaza¯lı¯. 36. Ibrahim Agâh Çubukçu and Hüseyin Atay’s 1962 edition of al-Iqtis.a¯d f ı¯ l-i ¶tiqa¯d , based on a comparison of four manuscripts, suffers from a surprisingly large number of misprints, and the list of errors on pp. 269–70, though not complete, should always be consulted. Only after fi nishing the work on this book, I came across a better edition of al-Iqtis.a¯d f ı¯ l-i ¶tiqa¯d by Anas Muh.ammad ¶Adna¯n al-Sharafa¯wı¯ (Jeddah: Da¯r al-Minha¯j, 1429/2008) that compares the edition of Agâh Çubukçu and Atay with two additional manuscripts, one unidentifi ed from the Da¯r al-Kutub al-Mis.riyya in Cairo and MS Dub- lin, Chester Beatty Library 3372, copied in 517/1123. An unusually large number of mis- prints also affects Jamı¯l S.alı¯ba¯ and Ka¯mil ¶Ayya¯d’s edition of al-Munqidh min al-d.ala¯l (Damascus: Maktab al-Nashr al- ¶Arabı¯, 1939), which compares two manuscripts. Farid Jabre’s edition of al-Munqidh is based on this text and evens out the misprints. Despite the fact that Jabre does not note the variant readings from S.alı¯ba¯ and ¶Ayya¯d’s edition, I prefer his edition. 37. These are the words of Muh.yı¯ al-Dı¯n S.abrı¯ al-Kurdı¯ al-Ka¯nı¯mashka¯nı¯ (d. after 1357/1938) on the title page of the editio princeps of Kita¯b al-Arba ¶ı¯n f ı
(Cairo: Mat.ba ¶at Kurdista¯n, 1328 [1910]). In the second edition of that work, S.abrı¯ al-Kurdı¯ describes in more detail the careful process of establishing the fi rst edition from four different manuscripts in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria and of taking into account the testimony of two further manuscripts for the second edition (Cairo: al-Mat.ba ¶a al- ¶Arabiyya: 1344 [1925]), 310–11. S.abrı¯ al-Kurdı¯ has done pioneering work in bringing books by al-Ghaza¯lı¯ to the printing press and taking care for the reliability of their texts.
not e s to page s 1 1 – 1 4 2 8 9 38. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Fays.al al-tafriqa , 195.10 / 61. ult. Cf. ibid., 190.2–3 / 53.5, 191.8–16 / 55.6–56.2. See also MS Escurial, no. 1130, fol. 84b (copied around 611/1214) and MS Ber- lin, Wetzstein II 1806, fol. 79b (Ahlwardt no. 2075), which both have us.u¯l al- ¶aqa¯ 7id in this passage. The latter manuscript was copied around 817/1414 and often contains very original readings, more original than those in MS Istanbul, S ¸ehit Ali Pas ¸a 1712, which, according to its colophon, was copied 508/1115 and which would be the oldest manu- script of the text, copied close to al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s lifetime. The Istanbul manuscript (fol. 66a) has us.u¯l al-qawa¯ ¶id in this passage. This and other apparently less original readings led me to suspect that the colophon in this manuscript is forged. 39. The edition is based on MSS Damascus, Z.a¯hiriyya Collection 6469 and 6595. Bı¯ju ¯ only occasionally notes variant readings. 40. When one of these early editors prepared more than one edition of a particular text, I work with the latest. 41. Sarkı¯s, Mu ¶jam , 1409; Badawı¯, Mu 7allafa¯t , 112. It is unclear how the texts in the lithograph editions of the Ih.ya¯ 7 that appeared after 1281/1864 in Lucknow (India) and after 1293/1876 in Tehran relate to the one in the early Cairo prints. 42. Bauer, Dogmatik , 7. See, however, Richard Hartmann’s objection in Der Islam, 9 (1919): 263. 43. See the colophon in the four-volume Ih.ya¯ 7 print of Bu¯la¯q: Da¯r al-T.iba¯ ¶a wa-l- Waqa¯ 7i ¶ al-Mis.riyya, 1269 [1853], 4:341. On the editor ( ra 7ı¯s fi raq al-tas.h.ı¯h. ), see Ziriklı¯, al-
never mention how the text was established. Mus.t.afa¯ Wahbı¯, the editor and printer of the second Egyptian edition, claims that he was struck by the odd punctuation ( wuqu
in the fi rst printing, compared it with manuscripts, and corrected it. (See the colophon in his four-volume Ih.ya¯ 7 print of Cairo: al-Mat.ba ¶a al-Wahbiyya, 1282 [1866], 4:469). Mus.t.afa¯ Wahbı¯ was the mat.bajı¯ who printed the Ibn Abı¯ Us.aybi ¶a edition of August Müller in 1299/1882. His work led to many complaints and corrections on Müller’s side, mainly because Wahbı¯ “changed the reliably established text according to his pri- vate ideas of what is correct or beautiful Arabic language.” (Müller, Ibn A
Uthma¯n Khalı¯fa, the Cairene publisher of a four-volume edition printed in 1352/1933, mentions that he took his text from a Bu¯la¯q print of 1289/1872–73. 44. See, for example, al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Ih.ya¯ 7 , 4:111.14 / 12:2224.7; 4:302.20 / 13:2490.17. In the fi rst passage, even older prints of Mus.t.afa l-Babı¯ al-H.alabı¯ have mu¯jid , which means the mistake was introduced after the 1930s. Cf. al-Zabı¯dı¯, Ith.a¯f al-sa¯da , 9:61.16; 9:385.32. 45. Al-Zabı¯dı¯, Ith.a¯f al-sa¯da. The two editions of this work also add the text from the printed editions of the Ih.ya¯ 7 in their margins. Note that the brackets distinguishing the matn of al-Ghaza¯lı¯ from al-Murtad.a¯ al-Zabı¯dı¯’s commentary are not always set cor- rectly. On al-Murtad.a¯ al-Zabı¯dı¯ and his Ih.ya¯ 7 commentary, see Reichmuth “Murtad.a¯ az- Zabı¯dı¯ (d. 1791) in Biographical and Autobiographical Accounts,” 85–87; and Reich- muth’s forthcoming book, The World of Murtada al-Zabidi , chapter 5. 46. Bauer, Dogmatik , 7, compares the two printed versions with MS Berlin, Wetzstein II 19 (Ahlwardt 1680), one of the oldest manuscripts available, which can be dated to 582/1186. He notes that the differences are “less signifi cant than one would ex- pect in a text copied so often.” Gramlich’s German translation of books 31–36 of the Ih.ya¯ 7 notes all variants among the print, the text in al-Zabı¯dı¯’s commentary, and MS Vienna, Nationalbibliothek 1656, copied in 726/1326. 47. On ¶Abd al-Qa¯dir ibn Shaykh al- ¶Aydaru ¯s and his laudatory address on the Ih.ya¯ 7, see Peskes, Al- ¶Aidaru¯s und seine Erben , 243–45, index. 2 9 0
not e s to page s 1 4 – 1 6 48. Farid Jabre uses one of these editions (the one of 1352/1933) for his lexico- graphical study on al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Essai sur le lexique de Ghazali . 49. These editions were newly typeset from the same stock of fonts. Since the fonts, the size of the paper, and the text remained the same, the differences of pagina- tion between the various editions that al-H . alabı¯ produced during the late 1920s and the 1930s are minor. Yet by the end of a volume, they may still add up to three pages between two different editions of this period. 50. Daniel Gimaret, for instance, used this edition in his studies on Ash ¶arite the- ology. It is nicely printed on acid-resistant paper. Given that this is a fi ve-volume edition (the fi fth volume contains the texts that were earlier printed in the margins of the four- volume editions), its pagination is not similar to any of the four-volume editions of the 1930s. 51. This edition was used by George F. Hourani in his two articles on the chronol- ogy of al-Ghaza¯lı¯ as well as by Hava Lazarus-Yafeh in her Studies on al-Ghazzali . I follow their practice and refer to the overall pagination of the edition given at the inside of every page. This edition has been photomechanically reprinted. In the acid-resistant reprint, the folio size is reduced to quarto and the sixteen parts are divided on six volumes. chapter 1 1. Leo Africanus, “Libellus de viris quibusdam illustribus apud Arabes,” 262–65.
2. Gavison, Sefer ¶Omer ha-shikheh.ah , fol. 135 a ; cf. Steinschneider, “Typen,” 75. 3. Van Ess, “Neuere Literatur zu G . azza¯lı¯.” 4. Huma¯ 7ı¯, Ghazza¯lı¯-na¯mah . The book was written almost twenty years before ¶Abba¯s Iqba¯l A ¯ shtiya¯nı¯’s edition of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s letters, Faz.a¯ 7il al-ana¯m . The second edi- tion of Huma¯ 7ı¯’s book, which came out in 1963 and which is richly indexed, has not been further updated and does not refer to Iqba¯l A ¯ shtiya¯nı¯’s edition of the letters or to any other literature that appeared since the publication of the fi rst edition. 5. In 1985, Nakamura, “An Approach to Ghaza¯lı¯’s Conversion,” 46–47, rightfully complained that the focus on the Munqidh led to a schematic treatment in Western lit- erature, which gave the image of “the eminent orthodox doctor ( ¶a¯lim ) to be reborn as a Su ¯fı¯ (. . .).” 6. In 2004, Hillenbrand, “A Little-Known Mirror for Princes by al-Ghaza¯lı¯,” 599, for instance, still thought it was impossible to know this date.
7. Al-Baqarı¯, I ¶tira¯fa¯t al-Ghaza¯lı¯ aw kayfa arrakha l-Ghaza¯lı¯ nafsahu . The book ap- peared in 1943.
8. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Munqidh , 45.3; al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:206.7. 9. Cf. for instance, Hillenbrand, “A Little-Known Mirror for Princes by al- Ghaza¯lı¯,” 594; Dabashi, Truth and Narrative , xiv, calls the ten years between 488 and 498 “al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s period of doubt uncertainty, and solitude.” Michael E. Marmura assumed that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ spent the eleven years after 488/1095 “away from teaching as he became a S.u¯fı¯” (“Al-Ghaza¯lı¯,” 140), and in the timetable at the beginning of Moosa, Ghaza¯lı¯ and the Poetics of Imagination , the author mentions that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ returned to T.u¯s in 493/1100—three years later than he actually did—and lived there “in semiretirement.” 10. Krawulsky, Briefe und Reden , 42–58. The reader should note that Krawulsky’s translation of Hijri dates to Common Era is not always accurate. 11. Ibid., 50. According to Krawulsky, those who contribute original material are ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r al-Fa¯risı¯, Ibn al-Jawzı¯, Ya¯qu ¯t, Ibn Khallika¯n, al-Isnawı¯, and Ibn Kathı¯r. This list seems arbitrary, as al-Dhahabı¯ should certainly be added and Ibn Kathı¯r be
not e s to page s 1 6 – 2 1 2 9 1 taken off. It also neglects important historians such as al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯ and Ibn al-Najja¯r al- Baghda¯dı¯ whose direct contributions are lost. 12. The discussion about the character of the Munqidh as an autobiography is re- viewed in Poggi, Un classico della spiritualità musulmana , 16–36. Poggi offers the most comprehensive study on the text of the Munqidh , its manuscripts, prints, earlier works that infl uenced the text, and later works of literature that were infl uenced by it. Poggi’s (ibid, 20–21) suggestion of a connection between Galen’s autobiography and the Mun-
the infl uence of Galen’s autobiography on Arabic literature) is comprehensively dis- cussed by Menn, “The Discourse on the Method and the Tradition of Intellectual Auto- biography.” 13. On Abu ¯-l H
. asan ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r ibn Isma¯ ¶ı¯l al-Fa¯risı¯, see Makdisi, Rise of Colleges , 82–83, and Bulliet, Patricians of Nishapur , 165–68, and index. 14. Brockelmann, GAL , 1:364; Suppl. 1:623; see also the decription of his yet un- edited commentary on forty selected h.adı¯th s in Ahlwardt, Handschriften-Verzeichnisse , 2:210. 15. MS Ankara, Dil ve Tarih Fakültesi Library, I . smail Saib 1544, which contains the second part of the Siya¯q , is reproduced in a facsimile edition by Frye, The Histories of
16. Al-S.arı¯fı¯nı¯ (d. 641/1243), al-Muntakhab min al-Siya¯q , 83–85 = Frye, The Histo- ries of Nishapur , text 3, fol. 20a–b. See also the index to the Siya¯q li-ta 7rı¯kh Nı¯sa¯bu¯r and its abridgement by Habib Jaouiche. On the somehow enigmatic relationship of the frag- ment of the Siya¯q to the Muntakhab al-Siya¯q, see Josef van Ess in the preface to Habib Jaouiche’s index, pp. vi–vii. 17. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 1:325.6–9.
18. Compare ibid. 6:204.6–214.3 with Ibn ¶Asa¯kir, Tabyı¯n kadhib al-muftarı¯ , 291.15–296.17 and his Ta 7 rı¯kh madı¯nat Dimashq , 55:200.11–204.6. Al-Subkı¯ discusses Ibn ¶Asa¯kir’s reason for omitting passages from ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r’s history in his T.abaqa¯t , 6:214.4–11. Al-Subkı¯’s version of ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r’s report is translated into English by Richard McCarthy, Al-Ghazali: Deliverance from Error , 14–19. 19. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:208.4–210.3. 20. Ibid., 6:206.7; al-S.arı¯fı¯nı¯, al-Muntakhab min al-Siya¯q , 84.6. 21. Fragments of al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯’s report are available in al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t, 6:215.5 ff. and 216–17. There is next to no treatment of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s life in al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯’s extant works. Al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯ does not mention al-Ghaza¯lı¯ in his Kita¯b al-Ansa¯b , 10:31, and only margin- ally in his al-Tah.bı¯r f ı¯ l-mu ¶jam al-kabı¯r . We know, however, that al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯ dealt with al-Ghaza¯lı¯ in his lost works, such in as his Dhayl ¶ala¯ Ta 7
works, see Rudolf Sellheim’s article in EI2 , 8:1024b, and Brockelmann, GAL, 1:329–30; Suppl. 1:564–65. On his position among the Sha¯fi ¶ite scholars of Khorasan, see Halm, Ausbreitung , 84–86. 22. See Griffel, “Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ or al-Ghazza¯lı¯? On a Lively Debate Among Ayyu ¯bid
and Mamlu ¯k Historians in Damascus,” 108. As far as I can see, al-Bayhaqı¯’s Persian work on the history of Bayhaq and its scholars—a district neighboring to T.u¯s— mentions al-Ghaza¯lı¯ only twice in passing ( Ta 7rı¯kh-i Bayhaq , 79, 235). 23. Ibn ¶Asa¯kir, Tabyı¯n kadhib al-muftarı¯ , 291–306. 24. The tarjama on al-Ghaza¯lı¯ in Ibn ¶Asa¯kir’s Ta 7 rı¯kh madı¯nat Dimashq , 55:200– 204, had already been reproduced in Badawı¯, Mu 7allafa¯t , 504–9, and, like the one in Tabyı¯n kadhib al-muftarı¯, offers no original material. Later historians cite Ibn ¶Asa¯kir with original information about the life of al-Ghaza¯lı¯ that is not included in these two entries. With the recent full edition of Ibn ¶Asa¯kir’s Ta 7
2 9 2
not e s to page s 2 1 – 2 2 volumes, the book becomes available for a much-needed comprehensive search for in- formation on al-Ghaza¯lı¯ and his students in Damascus. 25. Ibn al-Jawzı¯, al-Muntaz.am , 9:55, 87, 168–70. 26. Sibt. ibn al-Jawzı¯, Mir 7a¯t al-zama¯n , ed. Hayderabat, 1:39–40; ed. Mecca, 2:548– 58. Further notes on al-Ghaza¯lı¯ are in the ed. Mecca, 1:146, 238. 27. Ya¯qu ¯t, Mu ¶jam al-bulda¯n , 3:560–61. He was the fi rst to include the misleading information that “some say he proceeded to Alexandria and stayed in its lighthouse.” Later, al-Subkı¯’s ( T.abaqa¯t , 6:199.12–3.) mistaken report that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ made his way to Alexandria caused much confusion. 28. Ibn al-Athı¯r , al-Ka¯mil f ı¯ l-ta 7rı¯kh , 10:145, 172, 325, 400. 29. Ibn Khallika¯n, Wafaya¯t al-a ¶ya¯n , 4:216–19,; al-Dhahabı¯, Siyar a ¶la¯m al-nubala¯ 7 , 19:322–46 (largely identical to idem, Ta 7
S.afadı¯, al-Wa¯f ı¯ bi-l-wafaya¯t 1:274–77; Ibn Kathı¯r, al-Bida¯ya wa-l-niha¯ya , 12:137, 149, 173–74; and idem, T.abaqa¯t al-fuqaha¯ 7 al-sha¯fi ¶iyı¯n , 2:533–39. For other, less signifi cant historians of al-Ghaza¯lı¯, see the anthology by ¶Uthma¯n, Sı¯rat al-Ghaza¯lı¯ wa aqwa¯l al-mutaqaddimı¯n f ı¯hi , 84–92, 143–49. See also the reprint of sources in Badawı¯, Mu 7allafa¯t , 471–550. Al- Dhahabı¯’s report is certainly the most interesting as he quotes from scholars who were opposed to al-Ghaza¯lı¯ and who are not mentioned by al-Subkı¯. 30. For instance, Ibn al-Najja¯r (d. 643/1245) is quoted as a source of information. The relevant part of his Dhayl Ta 7rı¯kh Baghda¯d is lost, and the excerpts by al-Dimya¯t.ı¯, al-
31. Griffel, “Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ or al-Ghazza¯lı¯? On a Lively Debate Among Ayyu ¯bid and Mamlu
¯k Historians in Damascus.” 32. Cf. al-Nawawı¯’s (d. 676/1277) extract of Ibn al-S.ala¯h.’s (d. 643/1245) T.abaqa¯t al- fuqaha¯ 7 al-sha¯fi ¶ı¯yya , 1:249–64 (= al-Nawawı¯, Mukhtas.ar T.abaqa¯t al-fuqaha¯ 7 , 267–76) and al-Isnawı¯ (d. 772/1370), T.abaqa¯t al-sha¯fi ¶ı¯yya , 2:242–44. 33. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:191–389. 34. See Laoust, ”La survie de G . aza¯lı¯ d’après Subkı¯.” 35. Abu¯ ¶Abdalla¯h Muh.ammad ibn al-H.asan al-Wa¯sit.ı¯’s work ( al-T.abaqa¯t al- ¶aliyya f ı¯ mana¯qib al-sha¯fi ¶iyya ) is yet unedited. The tarjama on al-Ghaza¯lı¯, however, is edited in al-A ¶sam, al-Faylasu¯f al-Ghaza¯lı¯ , 153–94; the worklist is on pp. 171–76. Some titles are mentioned twice. 36. Cf. for instance, long articles on al-Ghaza¯lı¯ in the histories by al-Subkı¯’s con- temporaries al-Wa¯sit.ı¯ and al-Ya¯fi ¶ı¯ (d. 768/1367), Mir 7a¯t al-jina¯n , 3:145–46, 177–92. A thorough comparison of these two with al-Subkı¯ would yield a systematic picture of the sources that were available to them. 37. Cf., for instance, the texts described by Ahlwardt, Handschriften-Verzeichnisse , 9:468–69, and the works used by Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought. 38. Al-Zabı¯dı¯, Ith.a¯f al-sa¯da , 1:6–51, with its center part on al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s life on pp. 7–11. For an earlier commentary, or rather a rewriting of the Ih.ya¯ 7 from a Shiite perspective, see Fayd. al-Ka¯sha¯nı¯’s (d. 1090/1679) al-Mah.ajja al-bayda¯ f ı¯ tahdhı¯b al-Ih.ya¯ 7 . Fayd. al-Ka¯sha¯nı¯ was a student and son-in-law of Mulla¯ S.adra (d. 1050/1640). His Mah.ajja al-bayd.a¯ contains no study of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s life. For a brief survey of its content, see William C. Chittick in EI2 , 7:476b. Among the more recent Muslim historians that gather earlier material on al- Ghaza¯lı¯ is al-Khwa¯nsa¯rı¯ (d. 1313/1895), Rawd.at al-janna¯t , 8:3–20, who includes a number of interesting (mostly Shiite and Persian) perspectives. 39. Schmölders, Essai sur les écoles philosophiques chez les Arabes . Almost two cen- turies earlier, a manuscript of the text was already known in Paris (today MS Paris B.N. fonds arabe 1331). In 1697, Barthélemy d’Herbelot paraphrased passages from this man- uscript in his Bibliotheque orientale 2:66, 693.
not e s to page s 2 2 – 2 3 2 9 3 40. Macdonald’s landmark article, “The Life of al-Ghazza¯lı¯,” of 1899, for instance, relies mostly on these three sources. 41. Ibn al-Jawzı¯, al-Muntaz.am , 9:168.19. 42. Ibn Khallika¯n, Wafaya¯t al-a ¶ya¯n , 4:218. peanult. This sentence also appears in the edition of al-S.arı¯fı¯nı¯, al-Muntakhab min al-Siya¯q , 84. ult. , which would make ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r al-Fa¯risı¯ its prime source. It is, however, unduly inserted by the editor, and it is not in the facsimile text of the unique manuscript edited by Frye, The Histories of
43. Al-S.afadı¯, al-Wa¯f ı¯ bi-l-wafaya¯t , 1:277.7–8, mentions it. 44. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz
this time, Sanjar (d. 552/1157) ruled over Khorasan in the name of his brother Sultan Muh.ammad Tapar (d. 511/1118), who is also known as Muh.ammad ibn Maliksha¯h and who resided in Isfahan. After Muh.ammad Tapar’s death, Sanjar would himself be- come a powerful sultan of the Seljuq Empire. 45. dowa¯zdah sa¯ l badı¯n ¶ahd wafa¯ 7 kard , al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz . a¯ 7il al-ana¯m , 5.2. The pur- pose of this letter is to avoid appearing before Sanjar, who had summoned al-Ghaza¯lı¯; and in order to achieve this, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ doesn’t mention the fact that his return to teach- ing at the Niz.a¯miyya madrasa may have already violated his vow in Hebron. This is in line with the view in his Munqidh , 48–49, where he implicity rejects the notion that his return to public teaching violated his vow at Hebron. In their respective dating of the let- ter, the editor Iqba¯l A ¯ shtiya¯nı¯ (in Faz.a¯ 7il al-ana¯m , 4, n.1) and Krawulsky, Briefe und Reden , 14–15, have overlooked this reference. 46. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ counted periods of his life in lunar years (cf. al-Munqidh min al-d.ala¯l , 49.17–19). Yet solar calendars were always used for tax purposes and also for the age of people. Cf. Richard Sellheim’s discussion of this problem in a book review in Oriens 11 (1958): 233–34. Ibn Khaldu ¯n, for instance, informs us that durations in horoscopes were given in solar years ( al-Muqaddima , 2:164, English trans. 2:224). 47. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Munqidh , 49.17–19. 48. wa-qad ana¯fa l-sinnu ¶ala¯ l-khamsı¯n ; al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Munqidh min al-d.ala¯l , 10.11. 49. Ibid., 48–50. 50. Ibid., 49.14–18. 51. I am grateful to Alexander Treiger, who pointed this connection out to me. 52. ¶Alı¯ al-Rid.a¯ was buried in the mausoleum of the ¶Abba¯sid caliph Ha¯ru¯n al- Rashı¯d, who had died there in 193/809. Shiite contempt for the ¶Abba¯sid’s grave led to its gradual destruction. The mausoleum became known as that of ¶Alı¯ al-Rid.a¯. 53. V. Minorsky and C. E. Bosworth, Art. “T.u¯s,” in EI2 , 10:740b–4b; le Strange, Lands of the Eastern Caliphate , 388–400; Ya¯qu ¯t, Mu ¶jam al-bulda¯n , 3:569–60. 54. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ most likely did not use the name because of its pro-Shiite conno- tation. Meshed (Mashhad) means “[ ¶Alı¯ al-Riz . a¯’s] place of martyrdom.” In 490/1097, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ referred to Nu ¯qa¯n/Meshed simply as “the site of visitation” ( maza¯r , al- Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz
55. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:193.10. 56. Abu ¯ H
. a¯mid Ah.mad ibn Muh.ammad al-Ghaza¯lı¯ or Abu ¯ H
. a¯mid Muh.ammad ibn Ah.mad; al-Shı¯ra¯zı¯, T.abaqa¯t al-fuqaha¯ 7 , 133. Al-Isnawı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 2:246–47, reports his date of death. See also al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 4:87–89, and Griffel, “Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ or al- Ghazza¯lı¯? On a Lively Debate Among Ayyu¯bid and Mamlu ¯k Historians in Damascus,” 107–11.
57. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:193.10–194.2; al-Isnawı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 2:242.9–12. 58. ka¯na l-Ghaza¯lı¯ yah.kı¯ ha¯dha¯ ; al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:194.3. 2 9 4 not e s to page s 2 3 – 2 6 59. Al-Dhahabı¯, Siya¯q , 19:335.9–17. The student is the unidentifi ed Abu ¯ l- ¶Abba¯s Ah.mad al-Khat.ı¯bı¯. 60. ta ¶allamna¯ l- ¶ilma li-ghayri Lla¯hi, fa-aba¯ l- ¶ilmu an yaku¯na illa¯ li-Lla¯h ; al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Mı¯za¯n al- ¶amal , 115.13–4 / 343.10–11; Ih.ya¯ 7 , 1:71.24–5 / 84.2–3. Cf. al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:194.3. 61. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 5:204.9; al-S.arı¯fı¯nı¯, al-Muntakhab min al-Siya¯q , 83 = Frye, The Histories of Nishapur , text 3, fol. 20a. Prompted by ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r al-Fa¯risı¯’s informa- tion, al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 4:91, gives this scholar his own tarjama and a full name: Abu¯ H . a¯mid Ah.mad ibn Muh.ammad al-Ra¯dhaka¯nı¯. Cf. also al-Zabı¯dı¯, Ith.a¯f al-sa¯da¯ , 1:19.16, and Halm, Ausbreitung , 94. 62. He was the father of Abu ¯ l-Azhar al-H . asan ibn Ah.mad al-Ra¯dhaka¯nı¯ (d. ca. 530/1135) of T.a¯bara¯n-T.u¯s, who was a scholar. On him see al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯, al-Tah.bı¯r f ı¯ l-mu ¶jam
the father is his name: Ah.mad ibn Muh.ammad al-Ra¯dhakanı¯. Given the fact that his son grew up in T.a¯bara¯n-T.u¯s, it is likely that he had settled there from the nearby Ra¯dhaka¯n. 63. ¶Abd al-Malik ibn Muh.ammad al-Ra¯dhaka¯nı¯; al-S.arı¯fı¯nı¯, al-Muntakhab min al-
connection between this al-Ra¯dhaka¯nı¯ and al-Ghaza¯lı¯. 64. On Abu¯ l-Qa¯sim ¶Abdalla¯h ibn ¶Alı¯, see al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 5:70. Who exactly held the position of the head teacher at the Niz.a¯miyya in Nishapur in these years is not known. Cf. Bulliet, Patricians , 255. Halm, A
¶Abd al-Razza¯q ibn ¶Abdalla¯h (d. 525/1130), the son of Abu ¯ l-Qa¯sim ¶Abdalla¯h ibn ¶Alı¯ and the nephew of Niz.a¯m al-Mulk, who is addressed in the anecdote of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s return from Gurga¯n. He, however, was born in 459/1066–67 and was probably too young to hold that offi ce during these years. His father, Abu ¯ l-Qa¯sim ¶Abdalla¯h ibn ¶Alı¯, how- ever, died in 499/1106, and if he held the position of head teacher at the Niz.a¯miyya in Nishapur, it would explain why it became vacant that year, when it was offered to al-Ghaza¯lı¯. 65. Unlike Makdisi, “Non-Ash ¶arite Shafi ¶ism,” 241, 246–47; idem, “Muslim In- stitutions of Learning,” 37; and idem Rise of Colleges , 302–3, I see no evidence that the teaching activity at the Niz.a¯miyya colleges was limited to fi qh and excluded kala¯m . I think there is much evidence to the contrary. 66. balı¯da bi-a ¶a¯lı¯ T.u¯s ; al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯, al-Ansa¯b , 6:28; le Strange, Lands of the Eastern
67. Niz.a¯m al-Mulk’s nephew Shiha¯b al-Isla¯m ¶Abd al-Razza¯q ibn ¶Abdalla¯h, who has been mentioned in note 64, became the leader of the Sha¯fi ¶ites in Nishapur. He also served as vizier of Sultan Sanjar from 511 to 515 (1117–21). Al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯, al-Tah.bı¯r fi -l- mu ¶jam al-kabı¯r , 1:442–43; al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 7:168; Iqba¯l A¯shtiya¯nı¯, Viza¯ra¯t dar ¶ahd-i sala¯t.ı¯n-i buzurg-i salju¯qı¯ , 243–48; Halm, Ausbreitung , 59; Klausner, The Seljuk Vezirate , 107; Kasa¯ 7ı¯, Mada¯ris-i Niz.a¯miyyah , 54–55, 99. 68. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:204.9–10. Ya¯qu¯t, Mu ¶jam al-bulda¯n , 3:360, gives the dis- tance between Nishapur and T.u¯s as ten farsakh . 69. Jabre, “La biographie et l’œuvre de Ghazali,” 77, suggests that “Abu ¯ Nas.r” was in fact Abu ¯ l-Qa¯sim Isma¯ ¶ı¯l ibn Mas ¶ada al-Isma¯ ¶ı¯lı¯, an infl uential teacher of Gurga¯n who was born in 407/1016–17 and who died in 477/1084–85. He was from a prominent fam- ily of Sha¯fi ¶ite scholars, and, while in Baghdad, he attracted the attention of Abu¯ Ish.a¯q al-Shı¯ra¯zı¯, the prominent jurist and theologian who was the fi rst head teacher of the Niz.a¯miyya madrasa. On Abu¯ l-Qa¯sim al-Isma¯ ¶ı¯lı¯ see al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 4:294–96, and al-Sam ¶a¯nı¯, al-Ansa¯b , 1:243.10–13.
not e s to page s 2 6 – 2 7 2 9 5 70. A particularly wide-ranging interpretation of this anecdote’s signifi cance has been offered by Moosa, Ghaza¯lı¯ and the Poetics of Imagination , 90–94. A more sober look is taken by Obermann, Der philosophische und religiöse Subjektivismus , 309–11, and Glassen, Der mittlere Weg , 79. 71. Ibn al- ¶Adı¯m, Bughyat al-t.alab f ı¯ ta 7rı¯kh H.alab , 5:2489–90. 72. It is briefl y mentioned in al-Dimya¯t.ı¯’s al-Mustafa¯d min Dhayl Ta 7rı¯kh Baghda¯d , 38. Cf. also al-Dhahabı¯, Siyar a ¶la¯m al-nubala¯ 7 , 19:335. 73. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:195.12–13. The question of the highway robber is put slightly more eloquently here: “How can you claim to know what knowledge is con- tained in these notes when we could have taken them away from you? You have been stripped of the knowledge of those notes and there you are, without any knowledge.” 74. dar darya¯-yi ¶ulu¯m-i dı¯n ghawwa¯s.ı¯ kard , al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz . a¯ 7il al-ana¯m , 4.16–17; Krawulsky, Briefe und Reden , 65. 75. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-M
76. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:208.4–8. 77. On the persecution of the Ash ¶arites and the impact of this event on al-Juwaynı¯ and Ash ¶arite theology see Griffel, Apostasie und Toleranz , 200–215. 78. Glassen, Der mittlere Weg , 66ff. 79. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:196.3–6, lists the following subjects in which he sur- passed everybody in Nishapur: Sha¯fi ¶ite law, differences among the schools of law, dis- putation ( jadal ), methods of jurisprudence and of theology, and logic: “And he read philosophy ( al-h.ikma wa-l-falsafa ) and became fi rm in all these subjects.” 80. Al-Kiya¯ 7 al-Harra¯sı¯, Us.u¯l al-dı¯n , foll. 27b–62a, and al-Ans.a¯rı¯, al-Ghunya¯ , foll. 19b–22a, who both also studied with al-Juwaynı¯ in Nishapur, devote much space to re- futing the philosophical notion of the eternity of the word. Both understood that this teaching goes back to Aristotle (see in al-Kiya¯ 7, fol. 57b; in al-Ans.arı¯, fol. 20b). Cf. Frank, Creation and the Cosmic System , 66. 81. Al-Juwaynı¯, al-Sha¯mil f ı¯ us.u¯l al-dı¯n (ed. Alexandria), 123–342. 82. Ibid., 196–97, 540–41, 618. On these passages, see the remarks on the read- ings by Frank, Creation and the Cosmic System , 17. 83. Al-Juwaynı¯, al-Irsha¯d , 59, 84. 84. Al-Juwaynı¯, al- ¶Aqı¯da al-Niz.a¯miyya , 12–13. 85. Ibid., 8–9, 11–12. On this proof and how it differs from Avicenna’s proof, see Rudolph, “La preuve de l’existence de dieu,” 344–46, and Davidson, Proofs for Eternity,
86. Jules Janssens and Erwin Gräf suggest that the Maqa¯s.id al-fala¯sifa was written many years before the Taha¯fut “by the young al-G . azza¯lı¯ in his student days” who “was probably an adept of the (Avicennian inspired) falsafa -school of his time” (Janssens, “Al- Ghazza¯lı¯ and His Use of Avicennian Texts,” 48; cf. Gräf in a book review in ZDMG 110 [1961], 163.) 87. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Taha¯fut al-fala¯sifa , 4.2–9 / 1.11–2.2. On al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s description of this attitude and his analysis of why the followers of the fala¯sifa disregard religion, see Griffel “ Taqlı¯d of the Philosophers. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s Initial Accusation in His Taha¯fut. ” 88. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, J
89. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 205.5–7. 90. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz
91. Abu ¯ Bakr ibn al- ¶Arabı¯, al- ¶Awa¯s.im min al-qawa¯s.im , 57. 92. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, Faz . a¯ 7il al-ana¯m , 12.3–4; Krawulsky, Briefe und Reden , 78. The Mankhu¯l , 618, mentions the Shifa¯ 7 al-ghalı¯l by al-Ghaza¯lı¯, which must have generated in the same period. 2 9 6 not e s to page s 2 7 – 3 2 93. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Mankhu¯l , 618. See Makdisi, Rise of Colleges , 244–45, 250. On the many meanings of the word ta ¶lı¯qa, see Makdisi’s Rise of Colleges , 114–28. 94. “ ‘You buried me while I am still alive. Can’t you wait until I’m dead?’ By this he meant to say: Your book outshines mine!” (Ibn al-Jawzı¯, al-Muntaz.am , 9:168–69). Cf. Sibt. ibn al-Jawzı¯, Mir 7a¯t al-zama¯n , ed. Mecca, 548, with the correct amendation. Cf. also al-Dhahabı¯, Siyar a ¶la¯m al-nubala¯ 7 , 19:335.8, who also understands it this way. Cf. Makdisi, Rise of Colleges , 127. 95. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯, al-Mankhu¯l , 618.9–11. 96. Al-Subkı¯, T.abaqa¯t , 6:205.1–2.
97. Ibid., 6:205.2–4. 98. Ibn al-Jawzı¯, al-Muntaz.am , 9:55.21–23. 99. Ibid. 9:170.12–13. A qira¯t was the twentieth part of a dinar. Ibn al-Jawzı¯ quotes the faqı¯h Abu ¯ Mans.u¯r Ibn al-Razza¯z (d. 539/1144) of Baghdad. 100. Glassen, Der mittlere Weg , 131; Halm, Ausbreitung , 165. The scholars were Abu¯ ¶Abdalla¯h al-T.abarı¯ (d. 495/1102) and Abu¯ Muh.ammad al-Fa¯mı¯ al-Shı¯ra¯zı¯ (d. 500/1107). 101. On the dating of these books see p. 75 Download 4.03 Mb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
|