al-Ghazali

Oliver Leaman

LAST REVIEWED: 10 MAY 2017

LAST MODIFIED: 26 MAY 2016
DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780195390155-0028

Introduction

Al-Ghazali (c. 1058–1111) is widely regarded as one of the most impressive thinkers in the Sunni Islamic world, encompassing a wide
range of intellectual positions through his career. He started off as a fairly standard Ashʿarite theologian but then became interested in
philosophy in the Peripatetic tradition, which he sought to refute, yet he also held onto some of its main principles and arguments. In his
position as a major thinker in the Sunni state based in Baghdad, he also spent some time and effort refuting the Ismaʿili challenge to
orthodox Islam. Finally, he became entranced with a version of Sufism and abandoned his official role and public status, preferring the
relative solitude and isolation of the mystical form of life. In all his writings, al-Ghazali put his own character into his work, and it is never
possible to accuse him of following others’ ideas slavishly. Indeed, if there is one theme that al-Ghazali can be said to have maintained
throughout his life, it is his repugnance for taqlid (imitation) and his advocacy of the significance of discovering the truth for oneself. Given
his frequent change of view, he was often accused by his enemies of being inconsistent, and the precise nature of his thought is difficult to
pin down definitively, thus leading to extensive controversy between those who believe that he is basically a philosopher with an interest in
mysticism and those who regard him predominantly as a mystic with occasional philosophical ways of expressing himself.

Bibliographies

A very comprehensive listing of new translations, critical works, and articles on the thinker appear in Daiber 1999 and Daiber 2007. The al-
Ghazali website has some less familiar material in non-English languages but is far less comprehensive. A very useful set of references
may be found in Griffel 2007, an entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Daiber, Hans. Bibliography of Islamic Philosophy. 2 vols. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1999.
Excellent and comprehensive bibliography by the major authority in the area.

Daiber, Hans. Bibliography of Islamic Philosophy: Supplement. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2007.
Contains excellent recent references.

Griffel, Frank. “Al-Ghazali.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edited by Edward N. Zalta. 2007.
Presents a very up-to-date and clear exposition of the main issues in al-Ghazali’s thought, with excellent bibliographical material.

Life
Abu Hamid Muhamad al-Ghazali was born in 1058 or 450/1059 in Tus and was educated there with his slightly younger brother Ahmad,
who also went on to become a distinguished thinker. Al-Ghazali came to work with al-Juwayni, the Ashʿarite theologian, at the Nizamiyya
college in Nishapur, and Watt 1963 explains how he grew close to the court, being appointed to an official teaching official position at the
Nizamiyya college in Baghdad in 1091. Al-Ghazali 2004 describes his life and how in 1095 he underwent a spiritual crisis and left his post,
traveling around the Islamic world until he ended up in his hometown of Tus, where he taught in a small private college until he took up a
post at the Nizamiyya college in Nishapur in 1106. He seems to have justified this decision to return to public life because the parlous
nature of the times demanded a change in his attitude toward such an official role. He died in 505/1111. Campanini 1996, Griffel 2009,
Lazarus-Yafeh 1975, and Nakamura 1998 find in his life important information about his intellectual career. Al-Ghazali’s works on
philosophy were very popular in the Jewish world and became much studied by Jews. He was also translated into Latin as “Algazel,” and
much quoted, although in both contexts he tended to be regarded as just another philosopher, not a critic of philosophy. In Islamic
philosophy he continues to be discussed in the early 21st century, and he was extensively studied in the past. The personal nature of his
style is linked with the content of his thought, and the passion with which he develops his arguments, along with their rigor, has contributed
to his continuing role in Islamic culture. Mitha 2001 provides a balanced account of his complex attitudes toward the Ismaʿilis Treiger 2012
discusses how his various books represent stages in the development of his thought and how he reacted to the works of others at different
times. On the other hand, Garden 2014 argues for the significance of his theological ambitions for the whole of his intellectual output.

Campanini, Massimo. “Al-Ghazzālī.” In History of Islamic Philosophy. Edited by S. Nasr and O. Leaman, 258–276. New York:
Routledge, 1996.
A sound general article on al-Ghazali’s thought.

Garden, Kenneth. The First Islamic Reviver: Abu Hamid al-Ghazali and His Revival of the Religious Sciences. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014.
Interesting account of the last period of his life and the centrality of his theological series of volumes, the Ihyaʾ.

al-Ghazali. Deliverance from Error: Five Key Texts Including His Spiritual Autobiography, al-Munqidh min al-Dalal. 2d ed.
Translated by R. J. McCarthy. Louisville: Fons Vitae, 2004.
Excellent translation of al-Ghazali’s spiritual journey, as he represents it. Some of his key theological and philosophical writings are
included, with detailed notes and references.

Griffel, Frank. Al-Ghazālī’s Philosophical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
The best contemporary account of al-Ghazali’s thought and the dating of his books.

Lazarus-Yafeh, Hava. Studies in al-Ghazzali. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1975.

Highly intelligent series of essays on different aspects of al-Ghazali’s work.

Mitha, Farouk. Al-Ghazali and the Isma‘ilis: A Debate on Reason and Authority in Medieval Islam. London: I. B. Tauris, 2001.
Presents a critical analysis of the complex relationship between al-Ghazali and a community that he criticized severely.

Nakamura, Kojiro. “al-Ghazali, Abu Hamid.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 4. Edited by E. Craig, 61–68. London:
Routledge, 1998.
Concise and clear, an excellent introduction to the scope of al-Ghazali’s ideas and influence.
Ormsby, Eric. Ghazali: The Revival of Islam. Oxford: Oneworld, 2007.
The most accessible modern work on the thinker.

Treiger, Alexander. Inspired Knowledge in Islamic Thought: Al-Ghazali’s Theory of Mystical Cognition and Its Avicennan
Foundation. London: Routledge, 2012.
Useful account of his intellectual development in terms of his various books and those that had an impact on him.

Watt, William Montgomery. Muslim Intellectual: A Study of al-Ghazali. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1963.
Provides a thorough account of al-Ghazali’s intellectual development.

The Attack on Philosophy

Al-Ghazali concentrated on a number of views, three of which, he argued, are not only erroneous but also heretical (see al-Ghazali 1997).
The eternity of the world is one of these, and the philosophers of the time tended to argue that the world eternally emanates from God, as
opposed to having been created at a point in time out of nothing. Al-Ghazali argued that if God really did make the decision to create the
world, it did not just flow from his existence but must at some stage not have existed, and then with his decision it came into existence. It is
only meaningful to call God an agent if he is capable of willing something to happen, and the philosophical account of creation makes it
look very much like an inevitable process in which God merely participates, and that he does not determine. Al-Ghazali also rejected the
arguments that God cannot know anything about contingent particulars, and that the afterlife is only spiritual. Hourani 1958 shows that al-
Ghazali argued that these theses are not only false theologically, they are also invalid logically, and so tried to cut at the essence of the
philosophical approach. It was formerly thought that the Incoherence of the Philosophers (sometimes translated as the Refutation of the
Philosophers) was a general attack on philosophy, but some observers, such as Jules Janssens (see Janssens 2003), now argue that al-
Ghazali is, in fact, closer to philosophy than is generally appreciated, and that this text and some of his other putative critical works on
philosophy are more the views of one philosopher toward others than a radical critique of philosophy itself. Al-Ghazali set his sights, in
particular, on some of the views of Ibn Sina or Avicenna (see Avicenna 2005), and yet at the same time he was attracted to other aspects of
Ibn Sina’s thought, which recur time and again in his work. In particular, he was enthusiastic about logic itself as a methodology, and with
reason as a whole. Like Ibn Rushd, who set out to directly challenge al-Ghazali’s Refutation of the Philosophers with his Refutation of the
Refutation (Ibn Ibn Rushd 1954), al-Ghazali believed that when a scriptural passage is not in line with reason, then it requires a symbolic or
allegorical interpretation, which is certainly to elevate reason to a high status in Islamic thought. It is almost as though al-Ghazali accepted
the central defense of philosophy initiated by al-Farabi that logic represents the deep structure of thought, but at the same time rejected
much of the Neoplatonic philosophy that al-Farabi and his successors constructed on that base. The modal implications of this view are
brought out by Kukkonen 2000. Leaman 1997 suggests that al-Ghazali, like Ibn Rushd, was critical of much theology, agreeing with the
later thinker that if theologians would only use respectable logical techniques to resolve the issues they regard as outstanding, they would
soon establish a resolution of their protracted arguments. This is also a point he made against the Ismaʿilis, who criticized the idea of
basing interpretation of scripture on ijma, given the difficulties in establishing consensus. According to al-Ghazali, consensus, in principle, is
not difficult to establish; it is just that those working in theology are frequently not well advanced enough logically to see how to resolve
controversial issues. The implications of this doctrine for the soul are outlined in Gianotti 2001.

Avicenna. The Metaphysics of The Healing: A Parallel English-Arabic Text. Edited and translated by M. E. Marmura. Provo, UT:
Brigham Young University Press, 2005.
Excellent translation of a text that was much read in the Islamic world, and then in Europe in general.

al-Ghazali. The Incoherence of the Philosophers: Tahafut al-falasifah, a Parallel English-Arabic Text. Translated by Michael E.
Marmura. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1997.
Now the standard translation of this famous attempted refutation of Peripatetic philosophy.

al-Ghazali. The Niche of Lights: A Parallel English-Arabic Text. Edited and translated by David Buchman. Provo, UT: Brigham
Young University Press, 1998.
An important theological text demonstrating al-Ghazali’s virtuosity as a Qur’an commentator.

Gianotti, Timothy. Al-Ghazālī’s Unspeakable Doctrine of the Soul. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2001.
An attempt to find unity in the thinker’s diverse comments on the soul.

Hourani, George F. “The Dialogue between al Ghazâlî and the Philosophers on the Origin of the World.” Muslim World 48 (1958):
183–191, 308–314.
A clear account of the major issues raised in the controversy that came to define so much of Islamic philosophy during this period.

Ibn Rushd. Averroes’ Tahafut al-tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence). Translated by Simon van den Bergh. London:
Luzac, 1954.
Contains useful notes, although over-obsessed with the role of Greek philosophy, and a translation of the key text in Ibn Rushd’s reply to al-
Ghazali.

Janssens, Jules. “Al-Ghazzali and His Use of Avicennian Texts.” In Problems in Arabic Philosophy. Edited by M. Maróth, 37–49.
Piliscaba, Hungary: Avicenna Institute of Middle East Studies, 2003.
Provides some detailed analysis of the complex relationship between these two thinkers.

Kukkonen, T. “Possible Worlds in the Tahâfut al-Falâsifa: Al-Ghazâlî on Creation and Contingency.” Journal of the History of
Philosophy 38.4 (2000): 479–502.
A useful account of the role of logic in the understanding of al-Ghazali’s major attack on Peripatetic philosophy.

Leaman, Oliver. Averroes and His Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1997.

A concentrated look at Ibn Rushd as a philosopher, with a lot of detail on his arguments against al-Ghazali. First published in 1988.

Al-Ghazali the Theologian

Marmura 2005 outlines how al-Ghazali spent much of his life defending the Shafiʿi school of jurisprudence and the Sunni form of Islam, and
has generally been assumed to be a member of the Ashʿarite theological school. In his technical theological texts, he tends to favor the
Ashʿarite position in most areas of theology, but his major text on theology is a work that he obviously regarded as his major contribution,
The Revival of the Religious Sciences (Ihyâ’ ‘ulûm al-dîn), a rather gloomy forty-volume series of works centered on the possibility of
redemption and what gets in its way, represented here in translation by al-Ghazali 1989, al-Ghazali 1997, and al-Ghazali 2001. What is
remarkable about this work, apart from its size, is its almost total exclusion of arguments. It is really an account of the sorts of behavior we
ought to cultivate with our own salvation in mind, with the emphasis on achieving pure states of mind, clearly a result of al-Ghazali’s latter-
day commitment to Sufism, as outlined in Shehadi 1964. He takes a rather pietistic approach here, favoring asceticism and the acquiring of
appropriate virtuous forms of behavior as a result of self-discipline. What makes reason singularly inappropriate here is its inability to judge
what is right and wrong. According to Hourani 1976 and Hourani 1985, al-Ghazali believed that people desperately need the help of
scripture, for otherwise they have no idea how to behave; what leads to paradise is good, and what leads to hell is bad, so there is nothing
in the actions by themselves that inevitably can lead one to classify them in a particular way. Leaman 2009 defends al-Ghazali’s approach
to ethics, suggesting that it is not as opposed to rationalism as is often suggested by the commentators.

al-Ghazali. The Remembrance of Death and the Afterlife: Book XL of the Revival of the Religious Sciences. Translated by T. J.
Winter. Cambridge, UK: Islamic Texts Society, 1989.
Excellent translation of one of the thinker’s most dramatic pieces of theological writing.

al-Ghazali. Al-Ghazālī on Disciplining the Soul and on Breaking the Two Desires: Books XXII and XXIII of the Revival of the
Religious Sciences. Translated by T. J. Winter. Cambridge, UK: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.
Very clear translation and account of one of al-Ghazali’s major explanations of the role of psychology in organizing the spiritual life.

al-Ghazali. Faith in Divine Unity and Trust in Divine Providence: Book XXV of the Revival of Religious Sciences. Translated by
David B. Burrell. Louisville: Fons Vitae, 2001.
Careful translation that allows the reader to understand how the thinker links the next world with how one should regard religious faith.

al-Ghazali. On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance in Islam: Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī’s Fayṣal-Tafriqa. Translated by Sherman
A. Jackson. Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press, 2002.
A good example of al-Ghazali’s theological style, and of his sophisticated approach to the nature of belief and its contrary.

Hourani, George F. “Ghazālī on the Ethics of Action.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 96.1 (1976): 69–88.
Major treatment of what is wrong with subjectivism in ethics, which, according to Hourani, has had a major effect on the interpretive
tradition. Reprinted in Hourani 1985, pp. 135–166.

Hourani, George F. Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
A collection of all Hourani’s works on Islamic ethics, explaining his approach to understanding moral language, and often criticizing al-
Ghazali in the process.

Leaman, Oliver. Islamic Philosophy: An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2009.

A general introduction to the discipline, with an emphasis on al-Ghazali.

Marmura, Michael E. Probing in Islamic Philosophy: Studies in the Philosophies of Ibn Sina, al-Ghazali, and Other Major Muslim
Thinkers. Binghamton, NY: Global Academic, 2005.
A collection of articles on Islamic philosophy, including several by a major al-Ghazali authority.

Shehadi, Fadlou. Ghazali’s Unique Unknowable God. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1964.
An interesting approach that tries to develop the logical implications of al-Ghazali’s mysticism on his view of the deity.

Causality

According to al-Ghazali, God created the universe as a vast mechanism, and everything about it is designed by him and kept in existence
by him. In fact, the connections between everything in the universe can be understood causally, and once God establishes the connections
between things, they have to take place as he wishes. Frank 1992 and Frank 1994 point out that this view is also found in the thought of
Ibn Sina. Ormsby 1984 shows that this world is also taken to be the best of all possible worlds, a view that later may be found in Ibn Rushd
as well—though Dutton 2001 analyzes their differences on this issue. It is in the area of causality that much modern controversy exists. The
accepted view formerly was that al-Ghazali, as an Ashʿarite, was an occasionalist, in the sense that he believed that what is regarded as
causality is merely an impression of regularity in nature resulting from what God brings about on our behalf. God kindly organizes the world
in a way that makes events regular and comprehensible, but in themselves there is nothing that holds those events together except for the
power and will of God. By contrast, Ibn Sina tends to regard causal connections as necessary, and once God has set the whole natural
process into operation, it runs automatically and according to a plan determined by the nature of things and their interconnections. Al-
Ghazali certainly did not accept this; for him, if God is to be a real agent, he must have the power to change his mind at any time, and he
must control how things link up with each other, if they do at all. The debate is summarized in Leaman 1996, which suggests that those
arguing for and against al-Ghazali’s Ashʿarite credentials often emphasize different aspects of his thought. But Marmura 1981 and Marmura
1995 show that al-Ghazali accepted that causality exists, but he argued that its basis is God and not anything independent of God. He also
argued, in vindication of this view, that we could understand a situation in which things behave very differently from how they normally
behave, which shows that causality cannot be part of the meaning of things.

Dutton, B. D. “Al-Ghazali on Possibility and the Critique of Causality.” Medieval Philosophy and Theology 10.1 (2001): 23–46.
A sophisticated approach to al-Ghazali’s account of modality and its implications for his view of natural science.

Frank, Richard M. Creation and the Cosmic System: Al-Ghazâlî and Avicenna. Heidelberg, Germany: C. Winter, 1992.
A sustained argument showing that al-Ghazali is much closer to the philosophical tradition than he himself admitted, despite the opinion of
most commentators up to then who identified him as a firm enemy of philosophy.

Frank, Richard M. Al-Ghazālī and the Ashʿarite School. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1994.
An argument that al-Ghazali is not as attached to the Ashʿarite school as is often thought.

Leaman, Oliver. “Ghazali and the Ashʿarites.” Asian Philosophy 6.1 (1996): 17–27.
Presents a balanced view of the range of ideas on al-Ghazali’s links with the Ashʿarites.

Marmura, Michael E. “Al-Ghazâlî’s Second Causal Theory in the 17th Discussion of His Tahâfut.” In Islamic Philosophy and
Mysticism. Edited by Parviz Morewedge, 85–112. Delmar, NY: Caravan, 1981.
Detailed analysis of a key passage in al-Ghazali’s critique of Peripatetic philosophy.

Marmura, Michael E. “Ghazâlian Causes and Intermediaries.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 115.1 (1995): 89–100.
A clear and lively account of the range of views on causality found in al-Ghazali’s work.
Moosa, Ebrahim. Ghazālī and the Poetics of Imagination. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005.
Beneath the postmodernist jargon, this work provides some interesting comments on the modern relevance of thinkers like al-Ghazali, as
well as accurate comments on his thought and role in Islamic culture.

Ormsby, Eric L. Theodicy in Islamic Thought: The Dispute over al-Ghazâlî’s “Best of All Possible Worlds”. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University, 1984.
Excellent account of theodicy in Islam, concentrating on al-Ghazali’s various positions on the topic.

back to top

Copyright © 2019. All rights reserved.