The Ten Rules of Imam al-Ghazali
A few days ago, I was listening to an audio lecture by Sidi Hamza Yusuf Hanson in which he mentioned a book, originally published in 1964, by Eugene A. Myers, which discusses in detail how key Western theologians and philosophers, from Thomas Aquinas ("considered by many Catholics to be the Catholic Church's greatest theologian and philosopher") to David Hume ("considered among the most important figures in the history of Western philosophy and the Scottish Enlightenment"), borrowed considerably from Muslim scholars such as Al-Farabi, Ibn Seena and Al-Ghazali. The title of this unfortunately out-of-print book is Arabic Thought and the Western World in the Golden Age of Islam, and it really is a treasure. The description on the front cover reads as follows:
"A survey of Islamic scholars and translators, especially at the height of Moslem dominance, who profoundly influenced Western science and culture."In light of the fact that there's a lot of ignorance—and bullheaded outright denial—regarding the degree that the eventual flowering of Western civilization was influenced and spurred along by Islam, starting today I plan to post and discuss a series of excerpts from Arabic Thought and the Western World in the Golden Age of Islam and other books of a similar nature. Actually, it's only the first five chapters (66 pages) of Myers' work that discusses various Muslim scholars and the particular influence they had, including plenty of examples of renowned Westerners who borrowed from them, since the later chapters are spent discussing translations from Arabic, listing the various books that were translated, and the impact which they had. Due to this, posting the various nuggets from it should not take a too considerable number of posts.
And finally getting to the issue that related to the title of this post…in the section sub-titled Al Ghazzali in Arabic Thought and the Western World in the Golden Age of Islam (pages 35-45), the author took the trouble to explain (pages 40-42) "The Ten Rules", that were "a summary of his ethics," which Imam al-Ghazali laid down for himself after "becoming a mystic." These Ten Rules, although in a somewhat archaic translation (i.e. "Moslem" instead of the more phonetically accurate "Muslim"), serve as a very thoughtful and useful summary of the Islamic spiritual life, and are as follows:
"Intention, he declared, is the first rule of conduct. This intention should be good and stable, good insofar as it tries at all times to accomplish its objective, leaving the rest to God, and stable insofar as it continues to be good, that is, persists in seeking its objective without being dissuaded from it by anything worldly.I'm not sure which original work by Imam al-Ghazali these Ten Rules came from, since the footnote in Myer's work refers to "Nabih Faris, in Philip K. Hitti and others, The Arab Heritage (Princeton, N. J., Princeton University Press, 1944), pp. 142-158".
Al Ghazzali's second rule is unity of purpose. This involves preparing for the hereafter, to be done by only serving God alone. We know we are serving God when we are satisfied only with the truth and when we deem everything else unworthy.
Realizing that this is a difficult rule to follow in a world where man is tempted at all times to become the slave of false values, and having himself earlier doubted the goodness of this rule, al Ghazzali warns against doubt as the most painful and deadly of all diseases. The outward sign of obedience to this rule is to prefer the hereafter to worldly affairs.
His third rule is conformity to truth, even at the expense of forsaking pleasure, by resisting desire and renouncing luxury and ease.
In his fourth rule al Ghazzali urged orthodoxy among Moslems. He believed that the variety of doctrines and sects divided men, fostered hatred, and led to the saving of no one. He therefore insisted that Moslems conform to established practice and avoid all innovations in religion.
The fifth rule forbids procrastination and urges daily examination of one's duties and actions.
In his sixth rule, al Ghazzali reminded his fellow men that they were incapable of doing anything without the help of God, that they should acknowledge that fact daily but not use it as a pretext for laziness in good works or neglect of independent action.
Al Ghazzali's seventh rule is one of fear and hope in which he preached salvation by faith.
The eighth rule recommends a life of devotion and prayer. To neglect devotional exercises is to shut oneself from the only source of spiritual power.
The ninth rule calls for continual observation and watchfulness. He who persists in meditating about God and banishes from this heart everything but Him will find God and will move from groping to tranquility, from tranquility to reality, and finally will attain true faith.
Al Ghazzali's tenth rule is consecration to a knowledge wherein one may see God. This rule should be pursued with diligence, both outwardly and inwardly. Its outward sign is perseverance in good works, since he who thinks that he can do without good works is morally bankrupt."
I should mention, in regards to the statement "one may see God" in the tenth rule, that this refers to seeing with the heart, not a physical seeing with the eye…since Almighty God, the Sublime and Glorious, is above all that.
If you want to learn more about what I call "The Good News of Imam al-Ghazali," I highly recommend the film, now out on DVD, Al-Ghazali: The Alchemist of Happiness, which is available from both the Rumi Bookstore and Amazon.com. Although I was somewhat skeptical of this movie at first, since being a grumpy old traditionalist, I wasn't sure if I like the idea of the life a great Muslim scholar treated in such a profane way. But try as I might, I couldn't help but really appreciate this film (and the two interviews, in the DVD Extras, with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Dr. Karim D. Crow are excellent as well). Indeed, the film shows how the life of this great Muslim scholar and sage offers a great hope to mankind in a way that should appeal to Westerners and Easterners alike—indeed every human being who finds a deep yearning for God deep in their soul. This manifest good news in the search for true happiness is that the way to God and sure knowledge of Him is there for all who want it—a step-by-step path and established methodology is waiting for you, so set your doubts aside and get busy!
If you want to know more about the path, follow this link. Once there, download and listen to The Sufi Path CD and the Virginia Suhba - Jan 1998 audio files that can be found by clicking on the Lessons tab at the top of the page. These lectures, given by a traditional scholar of Islamic spirituality, should be enough to get you started, insha'llah.
Tasawwuf on...
Labels: History - Christian, History - Muslim, Sufism
posted by @ 1:13 PM
Comment Guidelines
3 comments
3 Comments:
In your post, when you say "borrowed considerably from Muslim scholars..."
What do you mean by "borrowed"?
As a student of philosophy and religion I might take issue with the following comment:"the degree that the eventual flowering of Western civilization was influenced and spurred along by **Islam**..."
While it is true that scholars from the Muslim world did a great service to humanity by keeping alive the works of the ancient greeks, through translating, interpeting and debating; to say that this had anything to do with Islam per say I think is a stretch. Those very same Muslim philosophers, who we owe a great debt, were usaully regarded as deviants or apostates by the orthdoxy for their embrace of greek thought and their unreliance on the Quran and Sunnah. And after Al-Ghazali's succesfull defence of orthodoxy from the inovation of Greek thought we see very little from the Muslim world in the way of influecial philosophy. An exception being Ibn Rushd, who again was very arisotlian in his philosophical method, and whose works of philosophy were rejected by orthodoxy, but praised in the west.
Another people who preseved this knowledge were the Irish. See: Thomas Cahill's "How the Irish Saved Civilization"
peace,
Robert
Muslim scholars did not merely 'preserve' the works of ancient Greeks. They developed, incorporated, adapted (and indeed rejected) those works, as well other 'ancient' cultures of learning. This is a profound falsehood (if somewhat understandable) that is propelled by many people.
The charges against Imam Al-Ghazali are always unsubstantiated and a misrepresentation. He did not, as some of his critics and even supporters might suggest, throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water. He was not "anti-science" or "anti-reason". He was a lot more subtle than that. Plus, there are a great many developments in learning, engineering and sciences that came long after the great Imam (see, for example, work by George Saliba or Muzaffar Iqbal).
Further, the cross-fertilisation was not restricted to a few ancient Greek philosophical treatises. Administration and practices related to pedagogy flowed both ways (e.g. see George Makdidi's works such as "The Rise of Humanism", and Jeremy Johns' "Arabic Administration in Norman Sicily"). For an example of this cross-fertlisation consider the coffeehouse, long held as an very important part of how European intellectual culture developed (the real birth of the Enlightenment came with Diderot's "Encyclopédie", and Diderot liked to hang out in coffeehouses). Such an place of gossip, exchange of ideas, poetry readings and so on have a precedence in the Ottoman Kahvehane (and both European and Ottoman rulers often clamped down against places which were seen as meeting points for dissenters!). Other examples include the 'scientific method' or the idea of citing sources.
(And yes, Byzantine, Persian and Hellenic cultures also influenced Muslim cultures a great deal when Islam expanded into these regions.)
Lastly, the use of the construct "the West" is flawed, imho. We should be talking about Islamic and European cultures meeting and mingling (and clashing!), rather than "Western" cultures. The very idea and understanding of "Western civilization" was developed mainly in the US during the 19th and 20th-centuries (especially after WWII), e.g. consider American classes on "Western Civilization" which contrast "the West" against 'others' which include beliefs, ideologies and movements that were very much European (e.g. Marxism). (For a contrast to this, consider German notions of 'culture'.)
This "West and Islam" is a contemporary geopolitical divide, driven by American political and economic concerns. It has valid uses in analysis, but the era under discussion in the post is really about European (pre- and post-Enlightenment) and Muslim cultures (pre- and post- Al-Ghazali and the rise of the Ottoman Empire).
Hi Thabet,
I agree with most of what you said, and if you notice I didn't say Muslim scholars merely preserved the works of the greeks but also interperted and debated them. The main point of my post is in regards to philosophy, not science, or cross cultural exchange. What I am proposing is that the philosophical advances that came from the Islamic world had nothing to do with Islam per say. It came from the free time scholars enjoyed thanks to the worldly sucsses of the Islamic empires, and this is something you see throught the history of philosphy and empires.
I notice a tendcy of the so-called "traditional" movement of western muslim, either converts or second generation, to look upon the cultural richness of past Islamic civilizations as some sort of proof for their religion's truth. I don't think this is honest. Some people would like to be muslims and freethinking liberals at the same time, and sorry, but the two don't go together. The monotheistic religions are xenophobic and intolerent at their core, and any cultural achivement of these societies usaully came from abandoning pieces of dogma, not adhearing to primary texts of religion.
I see a lot of good minds in this "traditional" movement going to waste by having to constantly apolagise for what their book says or having to rework their Quranic cosmology every few months to keep up with changes in science and ethics.
Save yourself the bother. There is most likely no all powerful god as descibed in the Quran or the bible, and in your heart you know it. Move on with what was good from Islamic history and culture and leave the rest. By moving past the religion and just taking what is good from muslim thought you could possibly bring to humanity some fresh and useful ideas.
Peace,
Robert
Post a Comment
<< Home