Al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s Philosophical


Download 4.03 Mb.
Pdf ko'rish
bet8/55
Sana07.11.2017
Hajmi4.03 Mb.
#19584
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   55

to Damascus in 488/1095. 

158


  In his autobiography, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ says such specu-

 

a   l ife   b e t w e e n   p ubl ic   a nd   p r i vat e   ins t r uc t ion  

4 3

lation had begun already during his lifetime. Those who speculated were un-



convinced that the reasons for his change were purely religious. 

159


  There is no 

testimony for al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s motivations other than the words we quoted from 

his  Deliverer from Error , and further conjecture disconnects itself from textual 

evidence. In the end, the reasons for al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s “crisis” in Baghdad are less 

interesting than the results. Other great minds suffered similar physical and 

psychological traumas, and yet such traumas do not feature as prominently in 

their biographies as in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s. 

160


  Whatever he experienced in the years 

between 485/1092 and 488/1095, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ created its historiography through 

his highly public conduct in the aftermath of these events and their narration 

in his autobiography. Rather than speculating about the assumed real motives 

behind his decision to leave Baghdad, one should focus on the effects they have 

on his subsequent work. 

 Earlier scholarship on al-Ghaza¯lı¯ assumed that there was a substantial 

change in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s thinking following the year 488/1095. Some scholars 

even tried to explain inconsistencies in his teachings by pointing to his “conver-

sion.” Such a hermeneutic approach is not warranted. Although the weight of 

certain motifs in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s writing changes after 488/1095, none of his theo-

logical or philosophical positions transform from what they were before. Con-

current with the report given in the  Deliverer from Error , evaluating the moral 

value of human actions gains a newfound prominence in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s œuvre. 

The connections among an individual’s “knowledge“ (that is, convictions), his 

or her actions, and the afterlife’s reward for these actions gain center stage. 

Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ saw his new understanding of the afterlifely dimension of actions 

in this world as a  tawba , a “repentance” or “conversion” toward a life that cares 

more for happiness in the hereafter than in this world. The  tawba  is a motif in 

Sufi  literature as well as in Muslim theological texts. It is a very public event in 

a Muslim’s life that is often talked and written about. In all his autobiographic 

statements, in his  Deliverer from Error , in his comments to  ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r al-

Fa¯risı¯, and in his letters, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ approached the events of 488/1095 accord-

ing to the established literary trope of a Sufi  repentance ( tawba ). 

161

  According to 



this literary pattern, the experiences that led to the change and the transforma-

tion are dramatic. In reality, there might have been a more gradual development 

that took years to manifest itself. On one subject, however, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ changed 

his mind profoundly. From 488/1095 on, he openly declined to cooperate with 

rulers and tried to avoid teaching at schools they patronized. 

 Why did al-Ghaza¯lı¯ travel to Damascus? The Palestinian historian  ¶Abd 

al-Lat.ı¯f T.ı¯ba¯wı¯ tried to answer that question in 1965. He suggested that al-

Ghaza¯lı¯ was attracted by the life and teachings of Abu

¯ l-Fath. Nas.r ibn Ibra¯hı¯m 

al-Maqdisı¯, a prominent Sha¯fi  ¶ite and a Sufi . 

162

  He died during al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s 



stay in Syria in Muh.arram 490 / December 1096. Abu¯ l-Fath. Nas.r enjoyed a 

far-reaching reputation for his austerity, asceticism, and his Sufi  teachings. He 

taught for no payment and refused to accept gifts. 

163


  It was said that he lived 

on a loaf of bread a day that was baked from the income of a piece of land he 

owned in Nabulus. 

164


  The legitimacy of the income gained through one’s teach-

ing became an important subject for al-Ghaza¯lı¯. 

165

  Food is illicit if it is obtained 



4 4   a l - gh a z a

¯ l 1


¯ ’ s   ph ilosoph ic a l   t h e olo g y

by illicit means. This includes food that is bought with money given by some-

one who himself has obtained it unlawfully. The property of rulers and their 

deputies, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ began to stress, should generally be regarded as unlaw-

ful. 

166


  The Baghdad Niz.a¯miyya was funded by endowments of lands as well as 

direct stipends that came from the Seljuq chancellery. From its very foundation 

in 457/1065, pious scholars were reluctant to teach there because they could 

not be sure its funding was proper and licit. Was the school built from spoils 

of earlier buildings? Was the endowed land lawfully acquired or confi scated? 

Were the stipends paid with tax money that had been violently extracted from 

its lawful owners? 

167


  Fear of dealing with impure and dubious things ( wara ¶ ) 

is a common motif in Muslim ascetic literature, and it seems to have played an 

important role in al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s decision to leave Baghdad. 

168


   Abu

¯ l-Fath. Nas.r’s 

ethics of unpaid instruction avoided these moral dilemmas that could easily de-

stroy one’s prospect of eternal reward for teaching rightfulness. In his  Revival,  

al-Ghaza¯lı¯ lists the obligation of teaching one’s students without payment as 

one of the fi rst duties of the teachers, second only to being sympathetic to one’s 

students and their fate in the life to come. 

169


  

 When the local Seljuq ruler offered Abu

¯ l-Fath. Nas.r a sum of money that 

he claimed came from a lawful tax, the Sufi  still refused it and sent it back. 

170

  

From this point on, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ adopted a similar attitude. Ibn al-Jawzı¯ men-



tions that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ would live from the income of his writing activity, 

171


   vow-

ing on the grave of Abraham in Hebron never again “to go to any ruler, to take a 

ruler’s money, or to engage in one of his public disputations.” 

172


  In his  Revival,  

he explained to his readers why particularly weak political leaders depend on 

public disputations ( muna¯z.ara¯t ) and why weak scholars are drawn to them. 

He warns his readers against taking part and lays down eight conditions that 

should be met if such disputations indeed prove necessary. The fi fth condition 

is that these disputations should be held in small circles ( khulwa ) rather than 

“in presence of the grandes and the sultans.” 

173


  

 In Damascus, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ taught liberally, and his sessions were attended 

by a great number of students. The chronicler Ibn al-Athı¯r reports that in these 

sessions, he began to read from his  Revival of the Religious Sciences   ( Ih.ya¯ 7  ulu¯m 



al-dı¯n ). 

174


  His teaching sessions (singl.  h.alaqa ) took place in the Umayyad 

Mosque and in a school building attached to its western wall. 

175

  Before al-



Ghaza¯lı¯ came to Damascus, this school was known as the  za¯wiya  of Abu

¯ l-Fath. 

Nas.r. It soon became known as the Ghaza¯liyya- za¯wiya  and was still known by 

that name during the eighth/forteenth century. 

176

  The inhabitants of Damascus 



also connected al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s name to the southwestern minaret of the Umayyad 

Mosque, whose upper part has since been rebuilt in Mamlu

¯k times. The story 

that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ lived in the minaret’s highest rooms may not be too farfetched. 

Ibn Jubayr (d. 614/1217) reports it fi rst, after his visit to the city in 580/1184. 

During his time, the spacious rooms of the minaret were a dwelling place for 

Sufi s, and an ascetic from al-Andalus inhabited the rooms in which al-Ghaza¯lı¯ 

was said to have lived nine decades earlier. 

177

  

 Claims that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ stayed in Damascus for close to ten years have 



become part of the local lore and were caused by  ¶Abd al-Gha¯fi r  al-Fa¯risı¯’s 

 

a   l ife   b e t w e e n   p ubl ic   a nd   p r i vat e   ins t r uc t ion  

4 5

mistaken account of al-Ghaza¯lı¯s travels in Syria, which was duly copied by 



Ibn  ¶Asa¯kir in his book on the history of Damascus. In his own comments on 

the subject, Ibn  ¶Asa¯kir leaves open the question of how long al-Ghaza¯lı¯ resided 

there. 

178


  When in his autobiography, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ mentions that he “stayed for 

almost two years in  al-Sha 7m ,” the name  al-Sha 7m  refers not only to Damas-

cus but also to the whole of Syria, including Palestine. Even his travels from 

Syria to the Hijaz and back fall within these two years. 

179

  After no more than 



six months, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ left Damascus and traveled to Jerusalem. Al-Subkı¯ con-

nects al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s departure from Damascus with the unwelcome experience 

of vanity. While attending incognito the teaching session of a scholar at the 

Amı¯niyya madrasa, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ heard his name and his teachings being quoted. 

He feared that pride (  ¶ujb ) might inadvertently overcome him, and he decided 

to leave the city. 

180

  

 Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ arrived in Jerusalem during the late spring or summer of 



489/1096. In his autobiography, he writes that he visited the Dome of the Rock 

every day and shut himself up in it. 

181

  Here, he published his  Letter for Jerusa-



lem   ( al-Risa¯la al-Qudsiyya ), a short creed that would later be incorporated into 

the second book of the  Revival . The  Letter  was considered a gift to the people of 

Jerusalem. It was intended to be studied “by the ordinary people” ( al- awa¯mm ) 

who fear the dangers of dogmatic innovations ( bid a ). The popular character of 

this work is evident from the way al-Ghaza¯lı¯ introduced it within his  Revival : 

 In this book [i.e., the  Revival ] let us just present the fl ash-lights [of 

dogmatics] and let us restrict ourselves to those that we have pub-

lished ( ma¯ h.arrarna¯hu ) for the people of Jerusalem. We called it 

 The Letter for Jerusalem on the Foundations of What-to-believe  and it is 

presented here in the third chapter of the book  On the Foundations of 



What-to-believe  in the  Revival . 

182


  

 In Jerusalem, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ may have written or published a second book, The 



Stairs of Jerusalem of the Steps Leading to Knowledge on the Soul (Ma a¯rij al-

Quds fı¯ mada¯rij ma rifat al-nafs). This assumption might just be deduced from 

the title, however, which also allows for other interpretations. 

183

   Al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s 



early biographers noted that after his departure from Baghdad, he turned to-

wards the subjects of “eliminating pride and exerting one’s inner self.” 

184

   This 


raised an interest in the psychological teachings of the philosophers. The Stairs 

of Jerusalem presents these psychological teachings; yet it is highly technical 

and not suited for popular teaching. 

 The local historian of Jerusalem, Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n al- ¶Ulaymı¯ (d. 928/1522), 

who wrote in 901/1496, provides reasonably detailed information about where 

al-Ghaza¯lı¯ lived and taught in that city. He reports that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ “stayed at 

the  za¯wiya,  which is above the Gate of Mercy and was known previously as the  



Na¯s.iriyya , east of the Bayt al-Maqdis. It was called the  Ghaza¯liyya  relating to him. 

Since then, it has been destroyed and fallen into oblivion.” 

185

  The Gate of Mercy 



ba¯b al-rah.ma ), east of the Bayt al-Maqdis, is the Golden Gate in the eastern 

wall of the H

. aram al-Sharı¯f, which here doubles as Jerusalem’s city-wall toward 

Gethsemane. The gate’s building is either Byzantine or early Islamic. Throughout 



4 6   a l - gh a z a

¯ l 1


¯ ’ s   ph ilosoph ic a l   t h e olo g y

its history, it has often been closed; since Ottoman times, its two entryways 

have been walled shut. 

186


  The  Ghaza¯liyya  school would have been on the top of 

this gate, situated on a platform that is currently empty (see fi gure 1.3).   

 This account of Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n is notably similar to the one given in ear-

lier sources about the school of Abu

¯ l-Fath. Nas.r in Damascus, which be-

came known as the  Ghaza¯liyya . Note that in Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n’s text, the school in 

 Jerusalem is called  al-Na¯s.iriyya  (and not  al-Nas.riyya ) and that the author leaves 

open to whom this name initially referred. 

187

  Yet, in another passage of his 



book he writes that the  za¯wiya al-Na¯s.iriyya  was probably where Abu¯ l-Fath. Nas.r 

stayed earlier “for a long time.” Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n cautiously suggests that the name 

referred to him. 

188


  However, no school is known to have existed at this spot 

during the pre-crusader period when al-Ghaza¯lı¯ was there. 

189

  Later, an Ayyu



¯bid 

school  al-Na¯s.iriyya  was built above the Golden Gate in Jerusalem during the 

seventh/thirteenth century. Its foundation in 610/1214 was part of the refur-

bishment of the H

. aram al-Sharı¯f by al-Malik al-Mu ¶az.zam  ¶I¯sa¯ when he was 

governor of Damascus. 

190

  The name  al-Na¯s.iriyya  referred to his uncle S.ala¯h. al-



Dı¯n (Saladin), who had reconquered Jerusalem from the crusaders in 583/1187 

and whose offi cial title was  al-Malik al-Na¯s.ir —the Victorious King. 

191

  Ibn al-



S.ala¯h. al-Shahrazu¯rı¯ (d. 643/1245), who was himself an infl uential commenta-

tor of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s legal works, had taught at this madrasa before he settled 

in Damascus. 

192


  By the time of Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n’s writing, it had long been der-

elict. It is most probably this school that Mujı¯r al-Dı¯n mistakenly connects 

figure 1.3 

Jerusalem’s Gate of Mercy. View from inside the Noble Sanctuary with the 

platform on top, the site of the Madrasa al-Na¯s.iriyya during the seventh/thirteenth 

century.


 

a   l ife   b e t w e e n   p ubl ic   a nd   p r i vat e   ins t r uc t ion  

4 7

to al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s time. 



193

   Abu


¯ l-Fath. Nas.r had left Jerusalem for Tyros and Damas-

cus twenty years before al-Ghaza¯lı¯ arrived there, and it is unlikely that schools 

existed in his name in both Damascus as well as in Jerusalem when al-Ghaza¯lı¯ 

visited these places. 

194

  

 Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ left Jerusalem in the fall of 489/1096 in order to take part in the 



annual pilgrimage at the end of that year. On his way to the Hijaz, he stopped 

in Hebron and visited the graves of the patriarchs, making the aforementioned 

vow. 

195


  From Hebron, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ continued to Mecca and Medina. His partici-

pation in the pilgrimage of 489 is a well-documented event. 

196

  Some Muslim 



figure 1.4 

The Gate of Mercy in Jerusalem. View from outside the city wall.



4 8   a l - gh a z a

¯ l 1


¯ ’ s   ph ilosoph ic a l   t h e olo g y

historians still believed he made the pilgrimage one year earlier, emphasizing 

how much confusion exists about the details of al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s life. This confu-

sion was, of course, created by al-Ghaza¯lı¯ himself when he lied about his plans 

before he left Baghdad in 488/1095. 

 Al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s own comment that he “stayed for almost two years in  al-



Sha 7m ” indicates a return to Syria after the pilgrimage. There is a report that 

Abu¯ l-Fath. Nas.r passed away shortly before al-Ghaza¯lı¯ entered Damascus. 

197

  

Since Abu¯ l-Fath. died on 9 Muh.arram 490 / 27 December 1096, this report 



must refer to al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s second arrival in Damascus after his return from 

the Hijaz. Four months later, in Juma¯da II 490 / May–June 1097, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ 

was back in Baghdad. During the year 490/1096–97, when al-Ghaza¯lı¯ left 

Syria, news of a great army of Europeans (   faranj ) reached Damascus, and the 

city prepared to send a contingent for the relief of the besieged Antioch. 

198


   The 

crusaders took Antioch in Juma¯da¯ I 491 / April–May 1098 when al-Ghaza¯lı¯ 

was already back in Khorasan. In his works, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ never refers to the ar-

rival of the crusaders in the Levant. There is, however, a single, quite drastic 

reference in a Persian work that could be seen as spurious because of this 

atypicality. In the  Present to Kings   ( Tuh.fat al-mulu¯k ) attributed to al-Ghaza¯lı¯, 

the author writes that the unbelievers ( ka¯fi ra¯n ) have taken over Muslim lands, 

removed pulpits from mosques, and turned the sanctuary of Abraham in 

Hebron into a pigsty ( khu¯k-kha¯ne ) and Jesus’ birthplace in Bethlehem into 

a tavern. Therefore, the author concludes,  jiha¯d  against these unbelievers is 

imperative. 

199


  

 His second sojourn in Baghdad is well documented by the reports of his 

student Abu

¯ Bakr ibn al-  ¶Arabı¯. Al-Ghaza¯lı¯ stayed at the Sufi  convent named 

after Abu

¯ Sa ¶d of Nishapur right opposite to the Niz.a¯miyya madrasa. 

200

   Every 



day, many people would gather there to hear him teach and read from his  Re-

vival of the Religious Sciences . 

201


   Revival  was an unusual book for its time. It was 

conceived as a work on the “knowledge of the path to the afterlife” (  ¶ilm t.arı¯q al-



a¯khira ), a practical guidebook on how its readers may gain the afterlife through 

the actions they perform in this world. 

202

  In the introduction, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ writes 



that the book is on the “knowledge (or: science) of human actions” (  ¶

ilm al-

mu a¯mala ) and not on the “knowledge of the unveiling” (  ¶ilm al-muka¯shafa ).  It 

wishes to provide that type of knowledge that prompts humans to act rightfully, 

staying clear of knoweldge that has no consequences for human actions. 

203


   The 

religious knowledge that al-Ghaza¯lı¯ wishes to revive is “the jurisprudence of 

the path to the hereafter.” 

204


   Revival  creates a new genre of literature by com-

bining at least three earlier ones: the genre of  fi qh  books on the individual 

rulings (   furu

¯ ¶  ) of Shari’a, the genre of philosophical tractrates on ethics and 

the development of character such as Miskawayh’s (d. 421/1030)  Refi nement 



of Character   ( Tahdhı¯b al-akhla¯q ), and the genre of Sufi  handbooks such as Abu¯ 

T.a¯lib al-Makkı¯’s (d. 386/998)  Nourishment of the Hearts   ( Qu¯t al-qulu¯b ).  About 

a hundred years before al-Ghaza¯lı¯, authors such as al- ¶A¯mirı¯ (d. 381/992) or 

al-Ra¯ghib al-Is.faha¯nı¯ (fl . c.390/1000) wrote works that combined philosophi-

cal ethics with religious literature.  Revival  stands in that tradition and borrows 

from it. 

205

  


 

a   l ife   b e t w e e n   p ubl ic   a nd   p r i vat e   ins t r uc t ion  

4 9

 In his autobiography, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ writes that “certain concerns and the 



pleading of the children drove me back to the native land.” 

206


  His family, who 

stayed behind in Baghdad when he left in 488/1095, had already come to T.u¯s 

and waited for him. When he now left Baghdad, he seems to have used the 

same ruse he had employed two years earlier. Then, in 488/1095, al-Ghaza¯lı¯ 

had pretended to travel to the Hijaz while he had actually gone to Syria. In a 

letter written shortly before his departure from Baghdad in the summer of 

490/1097, he claimed to be leaving for the Hijaz. 

207


  Another letter permits the 

conclusion that in Dhu

¯ l-h.ijja 490 / November 1097, he was already back in 

T.u¯s, 


208

  leaving no more than six months during the summer of 490/1097 for 

his second and last stay in Baghdad. 

 The Ideal of a Secluded Life–His Last Years in Khorasan 

 The Iranian historian  ¶Abd al-H

. usayn Zarrı¯nku

¯b characterized al-Ghaza¯lı¯’s 

decision to leave Baghdad in 488/1095 as an “escape from the madrasa.” 

209

  

This is correct only insofar as the madrasa was a state institution and effec-



tively part of the Seljuq administration. His three vows at Hebron reveal that 

al-Ghaza¯lı¯ rejected the state and its offi cials, but not teaching in schools. Al-

Ghaza¯lı¯ never gave up teaching, nor did he ever take time off from teaching. 

After 488/1095, however, his teaching largely took place at small madrasas that 

were not founded and fi nanced by the Seljuq state. Such a small madrasa, or, as 

we would say today, a private madrasa, was often called a  za¯wiya , a “corner.” In 

Medieval Latin, unoffi cial teaching that was not authorized by the church was 

sometimes called teaching “in corners” ( in vinculi ). Something similar might 

be behind the usage of the Arabic  za¯wiya .  Offi cial teaching happened in madra-

sas, unoffi cial teachings in a “corner.” Abu

¯ l-Fath. Nas.r’s school in Damascus, 

for instance, was a  za¯wiya . In his  Revival,   al-Ghaza¯lı¯ says that scholars fall into 

two groups: those  muftı¯ s, that is, scholars, who write offi cal  fatwa¯ s and who 


Download 4.03 Mb.

Do'stlaringiz bilan baham:
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   55




Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling