al-ghazali and his influence
Post on 14-Apr-2018
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
1/9
December 9 - 10, 2011 Yale University, New Haven
Organized by the Council on Middle East Studies at Yale University
Participants Schedule Abstracts Venue Home Middle East Studies
Abstracts
A. David K. Owen, Harvard University
Al-Mukhtar al-Shinqiti (d. 1973) and the Reception of al-Ghazali'sLegal Methodology in Saudi Arabia: A Case Study"
In a series of articles culminating with "Logic, Formal Arguments and
Formalization of Arguments in Sunni Jurisprudence," Wael Hallaq has shown
the decisive influence enjoyed by al-Ghazalis work on legal argumentation up
to the time of the much commented upon Ibn al-Hajib, in particular by focusing
on the logical introduction that begins the Mustasfa and a number of usul
al-fiqh texts thereafter. In this paper, I aim to further Hallaqs project through
an analysis of the legal logic of Muhammad al-Amin ibn Muhammad al-Mukhtar
al-Shinqiti (d. 1973), a prominent teacher ofusul al-fiqh in Riyadh and Medina
in Saudi Arabia during much of the twentieth century. In so doing, I show that
in Islamic jurisprudence the Ghazalian synthesis has survived until recent
times.
Focusing on al-Mukhtar al-Shinqitis treatment of qiyas in his Mudhakkira fi usul al-fiqh, itself a
commentary on the Rawdat al-nazir of Ibn Qudama, I first characterize this work as an
explanatory commentary, and demonstrate that the Mudhakkira, like the Rawdat, is heavily
influenced by al-Ghazalis treatment of legal logic in the Mustasfa. But why, in a commentary that
never shrinks from addressing aqli themes, does al-Mukhtar al-Shinqiti forgo the Ghazalian
tradition of beginning his usulwork with an introduction on logic? The answer lies, at least in
part, in an independent treatise by al-Mukhtar al-Shinqiti Adab al-bahth wa l-munazara, which
includes a separate chapter on logic for use in the religious sciences. I compare the treatment of
burhan in Adab al-bahth with the treatment of qiyas in Mudhakkira, I show the possible
antecedents for this method of organization in earlier commentaries on al-Ghazalis Mustasfa, and
I close by speculating about the authors purpose in separating the two.
Ahmed El Shamsy, University of Chicago
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
2/9
Al-Ghazalis Empiricist Ethics: Reading The Wisdom in Gods Creations (al-Hikma fi
makhluqat Allah)
Both modern scholars of Muslim theology and medieval critics of Asharism have claimed that
Asharite voluntarism necessarily implies a view of God as an arbitrary and aimless ruler over
creation. According to this argument, al-Ghazali's insistence on a God whose creation and law
serve intelligible aims is inconsistent. This paper argues that an examination of al-Ghazali's
hitherto overlooked treatise on The Wisdom in Gods Creations (al-Hikma fi makhluqat Allah)reveals what might be termed an empiricist approach to divine creation. This approach also
structures al-Ghazalis ethical and legal thought and allows him to avoid embracing Mutazilite
rationalist ethics in order to justify a belief in divine purposefulness. There is evidence to suggest
that al-Ghazalis theory was influenced by an engagement with the thought of Galen, especially
the latters De usu partium.
Anna Ayse Akasoy, Oxford University
Al-Ghazali, Religionswissenschaft, and Inter-religious Dialogue
In 1991, Hermann Landolt published an interpretation of al-Ghazalis Mishkat al-anwar in an
article with the title Al-Ghazali and Religionswissenschaft. By using the German term for
religious sciences, Landolt conjured up the Zeitgeist of nineteenth-century Western Europe. At
the beginning of his article, he suggests that al-Ghazali presented himself in his al-Munqidh min
al-dalalas a comparative religionist of sorts, meaning that he was interested in distinguishing
the original belief (intuition, fitra) from what individuals acquired per taqlid from their parents.
To justify his association of the medieval Muslim author and the modern academic discipline,
Landolt used a distinction in Religionswissenschaft discussed by Charles Adams according to
which comparative views of religion are characterized by two elements: epoch, the irenic
bracketing of ones own religious convictions, and the attempt to develop a taxonomy which
reflects ones own background. Both, Landolt claimed, are represented in the veil section at the
end of the Mishkat al-anwar.
A pre-modern author whose approach to religious diversity has been described in similar terms is
Ramon Llull (12321316) who incorporated some of al-Ghazalis philosophical ideas. Not unlike
al-Ghazali, the Catalan missionary intended to defend the truth of his religion with the help of
universal rational principles rather than simply referring to scripture. Llulls Art, a quasi-
mathematical method to describe all of reality, is meant to accomplish this.
In addition to the parallels and direct connections, both authors appear as positive examples ofmedieval rational approaches to religion among modern representatives of their respective faiths,
but also in inter-religious dialogue. For many Muslim participants in debates about the
relationship between Islam and the West, al-Ghazali is an attractive figure. He elicits positive
responses among many fellow Muslims, both traditional and liberal, as well as among Christians
who often acknowledge the significance of al-Ghazali in Islamic intellectual history and the
transmission of philosophical knowledge from the Muslim world to the Latin West. Tariq
Ramadans modernizing, yet traditional interpretation of Islam, for example, is sometimes
identified with al-Ghazalis conservative combination of rationalism and spirituality. Some of
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
3/9
Ramadans critics, somewhat reviving the medieval Tahafutcontroversy, defend Ibn Rushd as the
more appropriate model for the twenty-first century and see in al-Ghazali a symbol of intellectual
stagnation.
In my contribution, I would like to address two main questions. First, I would like to critically
assess Landolts association of al-Ghazali and Religionswissenschaft. Particular attention will be
paid to the ways Religious Studies in the West have responded to the greater prominence of
religion in public life. I will argue that there are significant parallels between al-Ghazalisapproach to religion and religious diversity and that of those modern representatives of
Religionswissenschaft who deliberately incorporate the insiders point of view. Such a shape of
Religionswissenschaft, however, is controversial. Second, I would like to discuss al-Ghazalis role
in inter-religious dialogue or debates about Islam and the West, in particular for Tariq
Ramadan and his critics and in comparison with the role of Ramon Llull for Catholic participants
in inter-religious dialogue.
Ayman Shihadeh, School of Oriental and African Studies, London
Al-Ghazali on Human Ontology
This paper will examine a small number of key Ghazalian works to establish al-Ghazalis stance
on the problem of human ontology. It will seek to show exactly why he found it extremely
problematic and precarious to defend an Avicennan-inspired body-soul dualism within a classical
Asharite environment, in which a materialist human ontology was accepted. The paper will show
how the difficulty lies not in the doctrine itself, but in its implications on the most fundamental
cornerstones of Asharite theology.
Jules Janssens, CNRS Paris and De Wulf-Mansioncentrum, Leuven, Belgium
Al-Ghazalis Commentary on the Light Verse (in the Mishkat al-Anwar) and itsinfluence on Fakhr al-Din al-Razi
In the second part of the Mishkat al-anwar, al-Ghazali offers a rather detailed analysis of the
Light verse (Q 24:35), which, in spite of obvious differences, has been inspired by Avicennas
commentary on the same verse in his al-Isharat wa-l-tanbihat. But already in the first part of his
work, al-Ghazali develops ideas that easily can be linked with the very same verse. When he
comes to deal with this verse in his great Tafsir, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606/1210) makes no
less than twice explicit mention of his famous predecessor. The first time, he does so in the
explanation of the identification of God with Light. He starts with an almost literal quotation
taken from a passage near to the beginnings of the first part of the Mishkat al-anwar. But in whatfollows, he clearly continues to use al-Ghazalis expos of this first part, sometimes by way of
parphrasis, sometimes by way of more literal quotation, while now and then omitting as well
some elements. Later on, when explicitly dealing with the symbolism that is present in the rest of
the verse, he presents, although in a somewhat abbreviated form, al-Ghazalis interpretation, as
developed in the second part of the Mishkat al-anwar, as one of the existing interpretations that
are worthy of attention (after al-Ghazalis, he adds Avicennas interpretation). All this will be
examined in great detail so as to determine the exact nature of the influence of al-Ghazali on
al-Razi, insofar as the exegetical commentary on the Light-verse is concerned.
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
4/9
Katharina Vlker, University of Otago, New Zealand
The Ghazali-Reception Among Muslim Intellectuals Living in Western Countries
By portraying some contemporary Muslim accounts of al-Ghazalis work and influence, I am
attempting in this paper to determine a) the context in which al-Ghazali is referred to, b) those of
his works and ideas which are mainly referred to and c) the importance and influence that
modern thinkers attribute to al-Ghazali. I shall reflect on such contemporary Muslim intellectualswho deal in more detail with al-Ghazali and who also have significance for the present religious
discourse on Islam in the West. I shall select two or three thinkers whose Ghazali-reception will
be compared. Their views on al-Ghazali might range from acceptance through critique to
rejection. Some of these notions may refer to different fields of al-Ghazalis work (ethics,
theology, exegesis, philosophy, and mysticism). For example, his incorporation of mystical
experience within a broader definition of rationality, might be positively received by some,
while other choose to reject al-Ghazalis idea that God can be known only through pure or
philosophical rationality. For some thinkers al-Ghazalis stance on philosophical reasoning
represents a fatal limitation of the capabilities of human reason. There is quite a large group of
contemporary Muslim intellectuals, which detects negative influences of al-Ghazalis thinking on
developments in Muslim thought. One needs however to assess decisively their arguments andthe coherence of their understanding of al-Ghazali.
One contemporary thinker Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd (19432010) proposes a welcoming sort of
rationality (to use Arkouns terminology) which goes beyond pure reason and incorporates a
common moral premise. For Abu Zayd an advanced aql always leads towards a search for
righteous thinking and acting. Pure rational thinking does not necessarily have this result. Abu
Zayd intensely reflects on al-Ghazalis work (in his Mafhum al-nass) and attributes to him a
number of consequences for Islamic thought (in his Naqd al-khitab al-dini). He also critically
assesses such consequences and draws conclusions for a change in current Muslim discourse.
Abu Zayd seems to sympathize with al-Ghazalis inclusion of mystical knowledge into thedefinition of rationally acquired knowledge, but on the other hand he is critical of limiting
philosophical thinking in its attempt to acquire knowledge about God. Hence, Abu Zayds
interesting portrayal of al-Ghazalis influence on Islamic thought is one possible goal of this
paper.
Again, it will be interesting how far Muslim intellectuals such as e.g. Abu Zayd, Ebrahim Moosa,
Fazlur Rahman, and Muhammad Arkoun perceive al-Ghazali and with what justification they reject
or accept his ideas. Other possible outcomes of this paper are a) the identification of specific
problems in evaluating al-Ghazalis influence on the present-day Islamic discourse, and b) the
classification of al-Ghazalis ideas to which most of the thinkers refer.
Kenneth Garden, Tufts University
Al-Ghazali in Contemporary Lebanon: Suad al-Hakims Project of Rereading His
Revival
Dozens of epitomes and Commentaries on al-Ghazalis Revival of the Religious Sciences have
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
5/9
been written over the past 900 years, beginning with those of al-Ghazali himself and continuing
through the present day. Often these synopses and commentaries aim as much to claim the Proof
of Islams authority for their own contemporary agendas as to convey the content of the Ihya
with concision. This paper will examine the most recent of these efforts, the 2004 The Revival of
the Religious Sciences in the Twenty-first Century (Ihya ulum al-din fi-l-qarn al-wahid
wa-l-ashrin) by the Lebanese scholar of Sufism, Suad al-Hakim. In this 700-page tome,
al-Hakim meditates on the balance between temporal engagement with the contemporary world
and the eternal guidance of divine revelation through the medium of the book she considers the
best synthesis of the Islamic tradition. One of her major aims is to confront what she sees as the
alienation of contemporary Muslims from Islam. To this end, she rearranges the order of the
Ihya, abridges its content, and simplifies its presentation to make it more accessible. She also
removes, comments on, or clarifies what she calls its defects (shawaib) to make it acceptable
to both jurists and Sufis. By comparing al-Ghazalis work with al-Hakims re-working, I hope to
shed light on the interplay of commentary and original that makes up a religious tradition.
M. Afifi al-Akiti, Oxford University
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of falsafa According to al-Ghazali
In this paper I will present some of the results from my recent and ground-breaking doctoral
thesis on al-Ghazali. The thesis identified and systematically considered for the first time a group
of esoteric philosophical writings called the Madnun corpus, now to be firmly attributed to
al-Ghazali. The discoveries are based on an investigation of around 40 manuscripts, many of
which were unidentified or wrongly identified, and almost all of which were previously
unstudied. The results of my work on the Madnun develop and establish definitively the tendency
in recent Ghazalian scholarship (by Frank, Janssens, Griffel, and al-Akiti, among others) that has
argued for al-Ghazali's reliance on Avicenna. The Madnun writings now provide the most
important textual evidence for that tendency. Besides acquainting scholars with a remarkable new
body of source material, the thesis presents a critical edition of the most advanced and technical
work of this corpus, the manual on metaphysics and natural philosophy called the Major
Madnun. I can show that this Madnun work, in particular, complements perfectly the Tahafut
al-falasifa and the Maqasid al-falasifa, respectively the good, the bad and the ugly of Avicennian
falsafa.
Martin Riexinger, Aarhus University, Denmark
Al-Ghazali and the 19th Century Reception of the Modern Sciences in the Islamic
World
In the later part of the 20th century the orientalist image of al-Ghazali as an arch-opponent of
rationalism became widespread among modernist Muslims. In the late 19th
and early 20th centuries, however, one particular argument made by al-Ghazali was crucial for
the acceptance of modern astronomy. In the preface to his Tahafut al-falasifa, al-Ghazali l ines out
that in that refutation of philosophical teaching he will not address the philosophers teachings on
astronomy as they are based on the observation of nature and on sound mathematical proofs.
Whoever objects to them with reference to the literal meaning of a Quranic verse or a hadith
does a disservice to religion, so al-Ghazali, since he would ridicule it in the eyes of the educated.
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
6/9
Hence the respective texts have to be interpreted allegorically.
Already in pre-modern times this argument was used to defend Ptolemaic astronomy against a
sunna-cosmology which was systematized and propagated by al-Suyuti (d. 1505), for instance.
An example for this is the Ottoman cosmographer and historian Katib elebi (d. 1657).
When post-Copernican astronomy became known in the Islamic world al-Ghazalis argument wasused in various geographical contexts to demonstrate that the new cosmology can be reconciled
with Islam. The first example was probably the Ottoman scholar Erzurumlu brahim Hakk from
the mid-18th century. Following or rather updating al-Ghazali, some scholars in the late 19th
century argued that not only can modern astronomy be reconciled with Islam but rather one must
do so in order to avoid that the new class of secularly educated Muslims falls afoul of religion
and indulges into materialism. Examples for this way of arguing can be found in the writings of
the Kurdish scholar Said Nursi (18781960) from Late Ottoman/ Early Republican Turkey and in
articles by M. Rashid Rida (d. 1935), who responded to request from his readers who themselves
confronted opponents with conservative views.
This way of arguing, however, did not remain uncontested as is shown by a conflict that arose
within the Ahl-i hadith movement in British India shortly after 1900. This puritan movement drew
its inspiration primarily from Ibn Taymiyya, hence most of their scholars advocated to understand
the term istiwa (sitting upright) that appears in a number of Quranic verses in reference to
Gods throne, as affirming the sunna-cosmology of al-Suyuti and other. Thana Allah Amritsari
(18681948), on the other hand, a scholar of the Ahl-i hadith with connections to Muslim
educational associations, propagated to interpret the istiwa-verses in the Quran allegorically as
a metaphor for Gods rule and by doing so he made reference to al-Ghazali. Amritsari, in turn,
was denounced as a philosopher and a jahmiuntil the dispute was settled in 1926 by the Saudi
ruler Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud, who himself had to face similar opposition from the Wahhabi ulama
when he introduced geography lessons in the new secular schools.
A second aspect which deserves consideration is that already in the late 19th century one scholar
in particular felt it necessary to make precautions preventing al-Ghazalis ideas from being used
to re-interpret Quranic verses along the lines of modern scientific concepts. In 1888 the
Lebanese Ottoman Husayn al-Jisr al-Tarabulsi (18451909) published his apologetic tract
al-Risala al-Hamidiyya. Apart from defending Islamic rituals and practices al-Jisr differentiates
between acceptable and non-acceptable scientific theories. His objections to the theory of
evolution influence Muslim opinions until present. Whereas al-Jisr justifies the adaptation of
modern astronomy using the arguments we mentioned above, he warns against accepting the
view that humans descend from animals. In this case, al-Jisr asserts, the allegorical
interpretation of Quranic verses cannot be justified because the arguments in favor of the theory
of evolution are only conjectural. Thus, it is not permissible to interpret allegorically the Quranic
verses that refer to the creation of Adam from inanimate matter.
Mohammad Hassan Khalil, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Reinterpreting al-Ghazali and Rethinking the Fate of Others:
The Case of Rashid Rida (d. 1935)
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
7/9
In his Faysal al-tafriqa bayna al-Islam wa-l-zandaqa, al-Ghazali delineates three categories of
non-Muslims: (1) those who never heard of the Prophet; (2) damned unbelievers who learned of
the Prophets true nature but were arrogant, resistant, or negligent in looking into his message;
and (3) those who heard only negative things about the Prophet. The first and third group,
al-Ghazali asserts, will not be condemned on Judgment Day. In fact, the same is true of
non-Muslims who learned of the Prophets miracles and then investigated it with sincerity
even i f they passed away as non-Muslims. Not so fortunate, however, are non-Muslims who
encountered the Islamic message in its true form yet rejected it because its truth was not clear tothem.
This criterion for non-Muslim salvation was adopted and revised considerably over eight centuries
later by Muhammad Rashid Rida (d. 1935) in Tafsir al-Manar. Whereas al-Ghazali holds that
learning of the Prophets message, his attributes, and his miracles provides sincere
non-Muslims including those who had previously heard only negative things about the Prophet
with enough incentive to compel them to investigate, Rashid Rida in his Tafsir makes a
distinction between learning of these things and being provided with enough incentive to
investigate. This suggests that, according to Rashid Rida, the former does not necessarily lead to
the latter. In a September 1910 fatwa, Rashid Rida affirms this distinction (immediately afterciting al-Ghazali) when he notes that those things that motivate investigation into the Islamic
message vary from era to era. According to Rashid Rida, the only non-Muslims who are not
excused for remaining outside the fold of Islam are those for whom the truth of the Islamic
message is evident, yet rather than accept or investigate it, they resist it. Rida justifies this
position by invoking Q. 4:115: If anyone opposes the Messenger, after guidance has been made
clear to him [or her], and follows a path other than that of the believers, We shall leave him [or
her] on his [or her] chosen path We shall burn him [or her] in Hell, an evil destination.
In this paper, I shall I discuss the ways in which Rashid Rida modifies and reinterprets
al-Ghazalis criterion. I shall then explore the reasons for Rashid Ridas revisionism and itsimplications.
M. Sait zervarli, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul
Ottoman Discussions on al-Ghazali, particularly during the 19th and Early 20th
Centuries
Al-Ghazali is one of the most influential Muslim philosopher-theologians in the Ottoman lands,
beginning from the classical to modern Ottoman periods. Early Ottoman scholars, such as
Khojazadah, Ala al-Din al-Tusi and Kemal Pashazadah wrote commentaries on his Tahafutal-falasifa, while his other major book Ihya ulum al-din was translated into Turkish by
Bostanzadah Mehmet Effendi in the 16th century. Al-Ghazali continued to be the focus of
attention throughout Ottoman intellectual history via commentaries, translations, quotations, and
in some cases criticisms, and he was rediscovered in the modern period as one of the sources of
revitalization in critical thinking. Apart from Arab reformists, modern Ottoman thinkers of the late
19th and early 20th centuries like Mehmed Ali Ayni, Izmirli Ismail Hakki, Filibeli Ahmed Hilmi in
the capital city of Istanbul intensively referred to al-Ghazali and the concept of ihya in their
efforts to revive modern kalam and philosophy. They were also influenced by the mystical
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
8/9
dimension of his thought, as well as his legitimizing the use of logic in the mainstream traditions
of religious disciplines. Besides, Suleyman Tevfik published the first two books of ihya in
Turkish, and Musa Kazim highlighted some Tahafut issues in a journal article. There were also
modern criticisms of some of al-Ghazalis views, among them Mustafa Sabris points are most
significant. References and discussions went on in the Republican era although with
comparatively less emphasis. In my paper I will analyze these debates and influences among
modern Ottoman Turkish thinkers and examine the role of al-Ghazali in the scholarship of the
period.
Scott Michael Girdner, Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, VA
Al-Ghazalis Philosophical Promotion of Traditionalism in The Niche of Lights and Its
influence Within the Jewish Tradition
The paper argues that al-Ghazalis adapts the philosophical psychology of Ibn Sina in order to
present a novel articulation of traditionalist hermeneutics and theology with special attention to
al-Ghazalis interpretation of Q 24:40 in The Niche of Lights (Mishkat al-anwar) and Q 42:51 in
The Balance of Action (Mizan al-amal). It will then briefly outline the reception and influence of
these interpretations in Judeo-Arabic works such as Maimonides Eight Chapters (ShemonahPerakim) and in Hebrew translations and commentaries on al-Ghazalis works.
Taneli Kukkonen, University of Jyvskyl, Finland
Al-Ghazali on Reason Going Wrong
The notion of a sound innate disposition, or fitra, is central to al-Ghazali's explanation as to why
and how humans come to know God and reach salvation. The first half of this presentation will
explore the psychological underpinnings of Ghazali's conception of this innate disposition and
how it finds its place in the cosmic order. The second half explores a more pregnant question:how is it that our fitra is sometimes prevented from reaching its natural goal and perfection, and
why is it that its aims can become so fundamentally perverted as to lead one away from God and
towards perdition? The answer, it again turns out, is intimately intertwined with al-Ghazali's
conception of the cosmic order, which bears a strong Neoplatonic stamp. The way al-Ghazali that
employs the late antique classification of logic lends added interest to his account of reason
going wrong.
Ulrich Rudolph, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Al-Ghazalis Concept of Philosophy
In contrast to earlier authors, recent scholars tend to draw a more nuanced picture of al-Ghazalis
relationship with philosophy. According to them, he did not simply attack the falasifa, but at the
same time made ample use of their writings and shared quite a number of their positions. This
new scholarly consensus raises even more than the earlier one the question of al-Ghazalis
concept of philosophy. What was/is philosophy according to him? How did he conceive it and
define or, at least, describe it? And how was his description related to earlier conceptions of
philosophy, both by the falasifa and by their opponents, the mutakallimun?
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
9/25/2013
-
7/29/2019 Al-Ghazali and His Influence
9/9
Ziad Bou Akl, Ecole Normale Suprieure, Paris
The Purposes of the Law in al-Ghazalis al-Mustasfa
In his last-written juridical summa al-Mustasfa min ilm al-usul, al-Ghazalidevelops a theory of
the purposes (maqasid) of the law which will have a great influence on later usuli literature:
every law aims at preserving for men their religion, soul, intellect, offspring and property. In this
paper, I propose to read these purposes of the law in relation with how al-Ghazali frames hisethical relativism notably at the beginning of the al-Mustasfa. Also, the paper will read the
al-Mustasfas parallel to the presentation of the purposes of the law in Averroes Bidayat
al-mujtahid. This will shed some light on the Asharite specitificy of al-Ghazls theory.
Sponsored by the Middle East Studies Council, the Edward J. and Dorothy Clarke Kempf Fund, and the MacMillan Center.
2011 The Council on Middle East Studies | The MacMillan Center | Yale University
hazali and His Influence http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/cmes/alGhazali/abst
top related