Truth Evident in the Many Beliefs of Al-Ghazali and Aquinas Essay

For Schleiermacher, in particular, and, additionally, the Islamic mystic Al-Ghazali, true religion was completely experiential and it should therefore be felt rather than thought. He believed that logic destroys religious experience because religious experience is a matter of intuitive knowledge, not processed knowledge. Intuition is belief, where as logic creates doubts. In many spiritual systems (religious or independent of religion) the human instinct is held in high regard. It was for this reason that Iqbal, the late Islamic philosopher of the modern era, disagreed with Al-Ghazali.

The medieval philosophers originated from the middle east, yet most adopted Jewish beliefs. Constitutors such as al farabi, ibn tufayl, and moss Maimonides produced some of the most profound pieces in Arabic political history. During this time, the Islamic region strongly dismissed the notions of Aristotle and Plato and focused solely on their religious teaching. But the Arabic philosophers saw a connection between the two. yet, they found it necessary to incorporate the idea of reason into their teachings. This caused conflict within their society because the citizens believed that there was no need for reason, rather the only need was God and his teachings. Further, they believed that the teachings of reason did not link to their religious values. Al Farabi infused his work with the work of Aristotle and Plato such as; the survival of the soul and the punishment of the afterlife. Ibn Tufayl philosophy pertaining to religion explains the harmony of joining reason and philosophical thought with

It is difficult to arrive at a conclusion when debating for the existence of God, in my opinion. However, between the readings I would have to consider Aquinas’ proof to be the most compelling. This is mainly because when trying to defend the existence of God, all I usually hear is that He is the creator of everything, period. Aquinas however put different scenarios into his writing to defend this idea. God, must have been the first to create motion, the first to create a cause, the first to not exist from another being, He must be the only one to have created beings, and is an all- knowing being to which everything in the world is directed to. Aquinas, analyzes the idea that some things would be impossible without the presence of a higher

1. Ghazali's journey from "the depths of conformity to the heights of insight" is closely aligned with Plato's Allegory of the Cave. The language alone, "from depths... to heights," brings the allegory to mind. His journey consists of exploring the four seekers of knowledge: theologians, esotericists, philosophers, and mystics. As he explores each of these in depth, it appears that the first three are merely shadows of the correct path to true insight. Ghazali easily explores theology, esotericism (not really), and philosophy through reading and observation because it is something he has been comfortable doing his entire life. However, with mysticism, he cannot understand it fully without actually giving up everything of importance in the physical world. He grapples with the decision to either sacrifice everything to cleanse his heart or to stay right where he is, content with the shadows. He doesn't have the strength to sacrifice on his own; thus, God forcefully pulls him out of the cave—"for God locked up [his] tongue and [he] became incapable of teaching" (79). Once he gets a taste of the life of a mystic it becomes hard for him to return back to the shadows. He does return to his homeland, but instead of working for fame and wealth, he works to get others to see the true

For thousands of years, mankind has persistently pursued truth, knowledge, and understanding. For most, this pursuit is a driving force which usually doesn't end until one finds a "truth" that is satisfying to him or her. Even then, however, one may choose to look for an alternate truth that may be even more satisfying to them. This pursuit does not always follow the same path for everyone as there are different ideas as to how truth is actually obtained and which is the best way to obtain it. Two individuals and great philosophers of their time, Plato and Charles Peirce, each had their own ideas on how truth and knowledge could be obtained.

Ghazali is considered one of the greatest scholars of Islam, he is a theologian, philosopher, and a Sufi. Theology and mysticism are essential components in establishing Sufism, which is the dynamic processor of orthodox Islamic practices. Ghazali Summaries the Islamic belief, worship, and spiritual, by outlining the foundational concepts of ritual and it's practiced. Also, he described the characters that the person must portrait to cultivate the perfection of faith. Both Shi'i scholars Ghazali and Shahrastani approaches to the three dimension of Islam. Ghazali explains the six pillars of Islam in a spiritual method that illustrates the beauty of Iman. Literarily, He teaches how to believe in Allah, by comprehending the knowing facts about

It is difficult to find a philosopher both in Muslim and Christian world from Middle Ages onwards who has not been influenced by his views. Ammar al-Talbi (2000) suggests that “Al-Farabi represents a turning-point in the history of Islamic philosophical thought, since he was the true first founder of epistemology which relies upon ‘universal reason’ and the demonstrations he gave”. Education is one of the most important social phenomena in al-Farabi’s philosophical system. Al-Farabi’s concern was to reestablish unity to Islamic thought. He believed the first aim of knowledge was knowledge of God and his attributes (F. Copleston, 1980). Philosophy and religion were for him simply two expressions of a single truth, philosophy explains religion and provides proof of it; it is neither in conflict nor in contradiction with it. According to al Farabi the perfect human being, is the one who has obtained theoretical virtue, thus completing his intellectual knowledge and has acquired practical moral virtues thus becoming perfect in his moral

Al-Ghazali criticizes Muslim Peripatetic philosophers on the idea that there is a necessary relationship between cause and effect on his work Incoherence. He does not reject the relationship but he argues that this relationship between cause and effect is not logically necessary. We perceive this relationship based on our observations of succession of events, and we think that they are necessarily connected. Ghazali gives an example of fire and burning; we observe that fire burns the cotton again and again, and we conclude that fire causes the effect of burning. Ghazali says that there is not such a necessary relationship between fire and burning because it is also possible that cotton can burn without fire or fire may not burn the

Apart from that, Rabbaniyah or Ladunniyah is the highest level of knowledge. This knowledge requires worship, nearness to God and noble spirit. Al-Ghazali related between virtue and perfection of the human soul with dignity in acquiring knowledge. It seems that al-Ghazali link between virtue and perfection of the human soul with dignity in acquiring knowledge. Therefore, people bond with God will

Al-Ghazali begins his discussion of theodicy with a conditional statement that will frame the rest of his one-hundred-line discussion contained in his Ihya text. This conditional statement has as its antecedent a series of eight hypotheticals which are aimed at creating a hypothetical multitude of immensely knowledgeable and wise creatures. The antecedent contains the following hypotheticals: all creatures being as intelligent and knowledgeable as the most intelligent and knowledgeable human, God giving each creature the maximum knowledge and wisdom that their souls can handle, God then giving each creature the combined knowledge of all creatures, God revealing to each creature the consequences of things, God teaching each creature the mysteries of the transcendent world, God teaching each creature about divine favor, God making each creature aware of final punishments, God making each creature aware of good and evil and of benefit and harm. All of these components of the antecedent serve to set up a scenario in which there exists a multitude of extremely wise and knowledgeable creatures. These components are presented in lines one through sixteen of the passage quoted by Ormsby on his pages 38-41 of Theodicy in Islamic Thought.

ABSTRACT: Few passages in Arabic philosophy have attracted as much attention as al-Ghazâlî's discussion of causality in the seventeenth discussion of Tahâfut al-Falsafa, along with the response of Ibn Rushd (Averroës) in his Tahâfut al-Tahâfut. A question often asked is to what extent al-Ghazâlî can be called an occasionalist; that is, whether he follows other Kalâm thinkers in restricting causal agency to God alone. What has not been thoroughly addressed in previous studies is a question which al-Ghazâlî and Ibn Rushd both see as decisive in the seventeenth discussion: what theory of causality is sufficient to explain human knowledge? In this paper I show that al-Ghazâlî's and Ibn Rushd's theories

Within the Sufi texts of Hallaj and Rabi’a there is an important, and continually controversial, inclusion of heretical ideas and statements. Yet as many Sufi thinkers have argued, and that I will argue as well, these heretical ideas and statements should not be taken at face value nor do they necessarily represent heretical beliefs. Instead the heretical ideas and statements of Hallaj, Bistami, and Rabi’a can otherwise be interpreted as a form of supererogatory devotion and piety to Allah. As well, within these statements Hallaj and Rabi’a draw attention to the distractions that separate one from union with Allah.

Al Ghazali was a Sunni and Sufi philosopher of the 11th and 12th century, during the Golden Age, a period of great economic growth and stability and a time when both knowledge and power was at its peak. He was born in 1058 AD in Tus, Persia and impacted greatly upon the Islamic faith, particularly toward Sunni and Sufi members; they know him as ‘the Proof of Islam’. Al Ghazali provided a positive impact upon the Islamic faith and its million of devotees and still continues to do so today through his many works.

Alghazali, in the latter section of the excerpt from this work, breaks down philosophy into several categories. The first is mathematics, which he says is opposite of religion because it contains facts that cannot be proven wrong. From this science emerges what Alghazali calls two evils. The first is a total denial of religion on the basis of mathematics, and the second is a total denial of mathematics on the basis of religion. Would this mean that acceptance of both religion and mathematics are considered good? On page 92, section 39, he writes, “One may say to such a man: ‘A person skilled in one field in not necessarily skilled in every field.’” Alghazali makes it a point to say that a person who is an expert in one subject may not be an expert in another. Having total knowledge of something does not give you the knowledge of all other things.

Knowledge, ilm, can be divided into two categories of Islamic sciences and the various other sciences not considered theologically. According to Islamic practice, God is the most praise worthy and the source of knowledge whose worship can be performed by knowledge acquisition if it is done for his sake. This kind of thought which can be also noted in Illuminationism doctrine is based on the Qur’anic verse that