The Unknowability of God in Al-Ghazali Author(s): David B. Burrell Source: Religious Studies, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Jun., 1987), pp. 171-182 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20019207 Accessed: 06/10/2009 22:19 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Religious Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

Rel. Stud. 23, pp.

171-182

DAVID

B. BURRELL, University

C.S.C.

ofNotre Dame

THE UNKNOWABILITY

OF GOD

IN

AL-GHAZALI

are lines of this exploration the God quite simply drawn. That our and Muslims for Jews, Christians, worship outstrips capacities as and hence must be unknowable, will be presumed characterization,

The

main

whom

reason

The

uncontested.

that God

stems

is unknowable

from

our

shared

that

confession

'the Holy One, blessed be He', and 'the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth', and certainly is one; 'Allah, the merciful One' oneness and just why God's entails God's unknowable deserves being that will occur as we move issue facing us is discussion, though along.1 The the one which

preoccupied

unknowability? The root meaning

al-Ghazali:

how

does

a seeker

respond

to that

'

'seeker', (tawlib) means the face of God', of'seeking along with the indescribability our discussion. of the face, will be presumed That's why we are throughout ' ' term unknowable struck with the clumsy rather than its more euphonious are such largely because For Western Greek form 'agnostic'. agnostics they and

of the Arabic

word

for 'student

that attitude

cannot

while the sufficiently compelling, they 'would not have 'as one to be atheists it.2 seeker So contemporary puts impudence to term feel it in enclose the marks when necessary theologians quotation Yet a genuine say, Aquinas' discussing, 'agnosticism' regarding divinity. or Muslim unknowing does lie at the heart of the inquiry of the Jew, Christian a search it is after God the which ; indeed, seeking unknowing distinguishes find God

to claim

for God discover

in an effort to lusting after idols. So let us follow al-Ghazali the lineaments of both search and seeker after an unknowable God.

from

I.

One

characteristic

produce

a scheme

philosophically all of reality

FINDING

THE

PROPER

MODE

to such a divinity or is to postulate it accessible. to the This was supplied in the neoplatonic world scheme whereby

way of responding which will render

minded is conceived

Muslim

as emanating

from

the One.

It was

al-Farabi

who

1 For the general point, see my Knowing theUnknowable God: Ibn-Sina, Maimonides, Aquinas (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame sec Fadlou Press, al-Ghazali, 1986); for specifics regarding Shchadi, Ghazal?s Unique Unknowable God (Leiden: Brill, 1964). 2 Jean-Pierre Jossua, The Condition of theWitness (London: SCM, 1985), p. 14.

DAVID

172

B. BURRELL

the manner

elaborated

of origination from 'the First', as he preferred to call so of all, and did with such care that Ibn-Sina could take it over whole cloth, with a few minor adjustments. Celebrated Ibrahim Madkour, by a contemporary as the distinctive contribution of Egyptian philosopher, an Arabic such cannot elaborate scheme but strike us a philosophy, for science That in fiction.1 is of because its course, gratuitous setting part, so astronomical base has been that ptolemaic specu? supplanted, heavenly lation must give way to verification. Yet speculation remains governed by and it does seem odd on the face of it that could think cogency, philosophers to bridge the hiatus from one to many merely nine by adding (or ten) the source

intermediaries. but

stones,

The could

bodies might heavenly warrant hardly postulating

spheres in the cosmic So there must have

have them

such stepping suggested in the role reserved for

scheme.

a yet since it was the Greeks deeper motivation, Let me suggest that motivation to have taught us to value consistency. ' as the intellectual of the much Leibniz and Newton's universe, ordering

who been

been

of a universal

dreams

mathesis

the seventeenth

inspired

of a potentially pale in the presence the hope is that the subsequent 'research tencies

What which

the neoplatonic mimicked the

powerful arrive at

emanation

scheme

powerful would be enabled

the One

from whom

of psyche from earth

will

programme' promised

was

them

out.

ordering

that

syllogistic, suitably to traverse the path in reverse, and are the to one another all comes. So fitted

cosmos

and

iron

a cosmic so

that

thinkers

an intellectual ascend may the path which the brought

to heaven, by retracing into being. set out It is just that pretension which Ghazali

ladder

Inconsis? century. and rightly so, for

vision,

Aristotelian

intellects

structures

fruitful

universe

his Tahafut

His

most

al-Fal?sifah.2 of ten or any number impossibility between the one and the many. To

to expose

trenchant

arguments to resolve of mediators attenuate

in and destroy the logical

show

differences

the disparity to bridge

is not

In fact, as Ghazali is precisely saw, the effect of the scheme logical divides. ' ' as to render divinity in the al-Farabi's First the of cosmos, part ambiguity so the distinction of the One from many and thereby undermine indicates, in is displayed of faith. This perception firmly underscored by his confession evacuates that emanation less cogent his ostensibly arguments genuine since 'agent' is a Ibn-Rushd finds these jejune, as well he might, agency. does fail to specify his primary term, and Ghazali analogous thoroughly analosrate. 1

It is not difficult

to supply,

of course,

as the Lord

of heaven

and

Laplace d'a? Farabi dans VEcole philosophique musulmane (Paris :Librairie D'Am?rique see Al-Farabi on thePerfect State, ed. Richard Walzer et d'Ouest, development, 1934), p. 14. For al-Farabi's see for Avicenne: La m?taphysique de Shifa, trans. G. C. Anawati Clarendon ; Ibn-Sina, Press, 1985) (Oxford: and G. Anawati 1978, 1985), al-Shifa: al-Il?hiyat, ed. I. Madkour (Cairo: Government (Paris: J. Vrin, i960). Printing Office, 2 A fine translation of Ghazali can be found in Simon van den Bergh (ed. and trans.), Averroes1 Tah?f?t ed. S. Dunya Press, 1954); Tah?f?t al-Fal?sifa, al-Tah?f?t (Oxford: Oxford University (Cairo: al-Maaref, Ibrahim Madkour,

1980).

THE UNKNOWABILITY earth

OF GOD

IN AL-GHAZALI

since is a free act. Moreover, the universe creating an to offer elaboration of creation, Ghazali's aspired

to whom

fal?sifah

173

it was they first looked. And telling he wanted the part of Muslim thinkers which

to be more

than

the Muslim

arguments of course that

prove to expose. He on pretension was not addressing to whom the distinction of the One from all the Greeks rest remained in umbrage; he was addressing his fellow believers in their as some And while he scored activity telling points against them philosophers. as philosophers, are the more trenchant against their adaptions his arguments a shared belief in God. to explicate of philosopy an historical-cultural fact about Ghazali and Here we encounter himself, as Louis Gardet would about Islam as well.1 Early Muslim lead us to believe, as to adopt and al-Kindi tended al-Farabi, notably a synthesis of with the Aristotle Plato (through spurious 'philosophy' ' into a relatively of Aristotle seamless explanatory scheme. ')woven Theology as it was, there was little chance to to in it work put Developed explicating to elaboration of the Qur'an, whose assertions imagery also lent itself more philosophers,

in terms supplied by Arabic poetry or by Iranian thought. Islamic philophers could not draw on anything like the efforts of early church writers in the east and west to formulate Christian in a philosophical idiom the implications was a part of Christian In this sense, philosophy of Jesus' life and teachings. as different from the beginning, individuals self-understanding sought to put of a faith-assent

it at the service of divine

and so enrich

revelation

;whereas (Augustine) system. There explanatory

independent Christian world, of his encounter

as Peter Brown with

'Platonism'

from within our understanding it presented itself to Islam as an were in the certainly parallels

notes

in explicating as an alternative

Augustine's to following

description Jesus in the as strange reaction

the very fact that we register Augustine's reminds us that it was a local phenomenon; Clement of Alexandria, Gregory how to read Plato as breaking of Nyssa, and others had already demonstrated in Jesus, precisely by displaying how his writings ground for God's revelation

church.2

Yet

to be the highest in showing that revelation be employed usefully - or 'true philosophy'. on the other hand, to work in relative Islamic tended, philosophers us that, to to of the sometimes try independence Qur'an, pausing persuade in assertions God's role creation could be understood say, Qur'anic regarding in an emanationist sense.3 Ghazali will have nothing ofthat. Moreover, since ' ' this collective endeavour of the philosophers had come to epitomize the in of intellect the Muslim Ghazali could that conclude world, activity only we cannot entrust ourselves to intellect ('aql) in the sense of relying on its could

wisdom

1 Louis Gardet, de la philosophie et de la pens?e Patristique', 'Rencontre musulmane Revue Thomiste LV (1947), pp. 45-112, so set up the situation cf. Leon esp. pp. 87-94. And exploited by Averroes: La th?orie dTbn-Rochd sur les rapports de la religion et de la Gauthier, philosophie (Paris: Leroux, 1909). 2 Peter of California Brown, Augustine of Hippo Press, 1967). (Berkeley: University 3 See the relevant expositions in al-Farabi and Ibn-Sina La (note 1 ) ; for an appraisal, Louis Gardet, pens?e religieuse d'Avicenne

(Paris: Vrin,

1951), pp. 41-51,

202-3.

DAVID

174 discursive

to orient

powers

B. BURRELL

us to what

is real and

true

however, with to destroy deftly

can we (haqq). Nor Ghazali himself uses

its discriminatory power, which as a pretence on the part of what he regarded quite an alternative to construct to revelation. Yet the stage is set for philosophers we might to the subject.' 'turn what call al-Ghazali's His Ashar'ite to traces of the him for convictions forbear already looking predisposed dispense,

creator

in the order

and

structure

from the regularities anything for necessity those reinforced

of the world,

of nature.

since one could

not conclude

the emanationist

Moreover,

same

since

such

model

a universe

convictions, stood over against the creating power of Allah, and so appeared inevitably an intelligibility to limit that power. Once to intrinsic natural species had in an emanationist of been articulated other creation model, ways explicating so as to accentuate its inherent had So intelligibility difficulty emerging. Ghazali creation, to serve

a reason to elaborate account of using philosophical an on instead focussing developing anthropology explicit enough as a vehicle for our search for God, and organizing Qur'anic

eschewed

a cosmos

to provide rich enough the setting ground for such a journey. That is already a great deal, to be sure, and it is striking that he never senses the need to offer any justification for these constructs.

materials

It is as

to assemble

though

the enterprise

of the philosophers, alternative

while

discredited

as an

to the Qur'an, nonetheless explanatory-scheme-cum-way-to-God a even con? luxuriant licensed world demanded) (and perhaps similarly out of cosmic to offer and human seekers after God structed powers, of a map for their journey. something

II.

THE

HEART

AT

THE

CENTRE

to the unknowability of God, then, and partly in reaction response ' to to the philosophers render divinity scheme accessible, was to teach us how reason at the service of the heart, as minister to its king.1 to place discursive ' 4 in it of the Supreme Reality is predisposed for the disclosure For the heart

Ghazali's

in all things' does he offer (m, b. 8, p. 24, M 378). Nowhere (Truth) present a systematic in the Ihy?' of the seeker, but in that place anatomy psychic to explicate four terms often used to refer to that in us he proposes where to the lure of the unknowable One heart (qalb), spirit (ruh), which responds reason or intellect each of the last three is said and ('aql) self/soul (nafs), to be given its inner orientation by the heart, which (in anther b. itself to be a divine 1, pp. 4-6; M thing (amr rabban?) (m, B 6, p. 19, 208).

place)

is said

365-8;

m,

b.

1 in the Ihya 'ulum al-din (Cairo, I shall be focussing on his mature 1967), an outline development : inG. H. Bousquet, Ghazali: vivification des sciences de lafoi (Paris Max is available Besson, summary of which are supplied in Richard McCarthy, Freedom and Fulfillment (Boston: which of and relevant portions 1955)5 and page to the Ihya will be by Book, boyan (or explication) v. References 1980), Appendix Twayne, number, followed by Bousquet (M) :for this reference, see Bk, m, bayan 3, p. 9; McCarthy (B) or McCarthy 371 (=111, b. 3, p. 9; M 371).

THE UNKNOWABILITY So as discursive

reason

it is the individual's which

directs

and

OF GOD

I 75

IN AL-GHAZALI

properly when at the service of the heart, to the divine invitation to become God's servant

functions

response absorbs

al-Ghazali's

efforts.

philosophic

And

since

reason to that primary becomes subordinated task, speculative everything reason : learning how to undertake the journey of a seeker, subserves practical the 'wayfarer for that. Moreover, with whatever may be needed knowledge only his own it and knows what

knows

station which station

knowledge encompassing It is enough 11, M 374). in it with a faith 'believe by anything

he has

is behind

And

cannot while

be entered Ghazali

(ibid.). glory' as a distracting preoccupation, speculation universe the truth about God and God's insist elsewhere

God's

As we things The

of God Most by the knowledge not does identify expressly it can be seen not to have led to

in the philosophers, and he does in that only exceptional fact, gifted with persons prophets, - can sciences and in those of engage both in worldly power

special the heart B210). (in, b. 7, pp. 22-23, to engage in cosmic speculation incentive

offered

him.

of the reality of what is before him' (m, b. 4, p. as that he for him, Ghazali wayfarer, implies, in the unseen'. 'hearts preoccupied Furthermore,

else than God

High's

in his journey: he knows an But he does not have

reached

there would be no real Finally, if the order and structure of things traces of divinity. hope to discover

no regularities in which we might shall see, however, when the initiative lies with can be read as ikons of the divine maker.

the heart,

countless

reason at the service of faith, then, has been set. It way of putting will be a way of practice and of interiorization. Not the task of transforming reason so serve as a vehicle of insight that itself speculative might philosophy into matters

but rather to harness the discerning divine, powers of reason am to the inner task of becoming the sort of person I called to become. The to the heart power in that activity will be the heart, for it is natural operative to respond to God's command The of God and (6amr). goal understanding to the practical is clearly aim of aligning subordinated one's self to the response of an untrammelled heart. Yet the subordination is a tactical one, for with that alignment will come an understanding far to the it to truths is native intellect know. What is necessary surpassing to the pure of heart, whose revealed intellectual efforts are bent on detecting

God's

world

entire

and detaching the veils of concern malak?t: the spiritual world, quite p. 22, B 209).1

their hearts, are the mysteries of the to intellect invisible (*aql) alone (in, b. 7,

from

a strategy for at a right understanding of God and God's arriving contrasts more with the of an Aquinas, program clearly speculative was to take philosophical who concerned in the itselfunderstanding Aristotelian and neoplatonic forms in which it came to him and make it Such

world

1 On malakut, see A. J. Wensinck, 'On the Relation between Ghazali's lxxv in Mededeelingen der Akademie van Wetenschappen (1933) 183-209, ch. 3 of his La pens?e de Ghazzali (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1940).

and his Mysticism', Cosmology and extended summarized

in

176

DAVID

B. BURRELL

the hybrid and so develop of religious understanding, to the aspiration cultural In Aquinas' of theology.1 world, knowledge - a - was at once a logos (or scientia) of God laudable and elaborate tkeo-logy a and conditions noble cultural task the That is, goal, represented possible. a bit from his were to accomplishing it. Without favourable detracting was one must also say that Aquinas the right person singular achievement, to his and extraordinarily in the right place at the right time responsive heart's desire. over

into a servant

and later with with Augustine, is better compared and not With and Pascal, Bonaventure, Augustine primarily, Kierkegaard. but with the invites his because Confessions, Munqidh comparison simply a to compose work such shows the the need on the part of both because however,

Ghazali,

to a divine invitation each gives to the inner task of responding primacy become what one is called to become. Ghazali's withyaqtn preoccupation Discourse in his autobiographical suggest Descartes' piece may certitude)

to (or to

to understand travails as far less Descartes' is disposed are as concerns their them himself, presents respective to as their subsequent not Which is resolutions.2 and deny Odysseys divergent construed that to be that each sought a point (Fappui, but where Descartes a sure harbour. an indubitable sought starting point, Ghazali ' Augustine's own quest : our hearts are sense of this of the universal summation opening ' as does the faith assertion restless until they rest in thee fits Ghazali neatly, us, but cerebral

one

unless

than

he

us for thyself, O Lord'. So the 'thou hast made that inquietude: explaining as creatures were whose self in it God's task is given inbuilt, (or forming since and heart intellect (qalb). And (6aql), spirit (ruh) sou\-nafs) comprises ' ' in those parts whose natural disposition that self images the creator precisely task than the that creator speaks, there can be no higher is to respond when to facilitate to each person : to order and to use those powers one entrusted a as divine into oneself make will which of the kind image response perfect as possible.

III.

RESPONDING

TO

AN

UNKNOWABLE

GOD

reflect God's and of that task both respect unfolding to note for Ghazali, answer to is that The how, easy question unknowability? in the in oneself the qualities in developing the task consists displayed his treatise of names ostensible is the Such of God. goal ninety-nine

How

1 On

does

the

see Aquinas, Summa science' the status of theology as a 'subalt?rnate (or 'form of knowledge') also and Spottiswoode, i (vol. i in T. Gilby London: 1963), i, Eyre (ed.), Theologiae, part question M.-D. 1957). Chenu, La th?ologie comme science au XIIIe si?cle (Paris: J. Vrin, 2 Farid are the 1958) shows just how superficial (Paris: Vrin, Jabre, La notion de certitude selon Ghazali to his problem a 'performative resolution' as Ghazali similarities with Descartes, (p. 126), adopts his situation of radical doubt characterizes Ghazali the art of certitude' (p. 130). Moreover, 'practicing as an illness, rather than enjoin such doubt upon us all as a method.

THE UNKNOWABILITY

IN AL-GHAZALI

OF GOD

177

-

names of God' But the Maqsad.1 of the beautiful the meaning 'explicating we in that God's unknowability does not that response jeopardize presuming to be merciful, can know God just, and the true/real One, compassionate, of being merciful, its manner etc.? It need not, of course, since it is precisely So or compassionate its proper which unknowability. gives divinity just, not there for Ghazali. arise does the is that However, why objection perhaps or shape so that the mercy we recognize must be some traces, some pattern can be related to that of Allah.2 Without that in our local holy man has no his project in the face of its denial, especially of that such Which realization. suggests enterprises hope a at least for us, of speculative modicum reason presuppose, practical in seen a left-handed demand of this have We recognition understanding. and

presumption, reasonable

of

task to to enable the essential his anthropology-cum-cosmology postulated or inhibited Ghazali from assuming is it that prevented But what proceed. as the practical task as well the speculative one, and thereby putting powers of reason, at the service itself, as well as the discerning philosophy of a quest for religious understanding? I have available schemes

of philosophical that the model understanding already suggested than of logical and cosmological to him was less one of inquiry and its origin. This the universe truths about necessary promising

not but

could

as 'cheap grace', instincts and in that his religious to 'the First' from once Allah had been assimilated

strike him

him well.

served

For

all else necessarily flows, exit the ecstacy demanded together with

which

that

with

of an Ibn-Sina

mysticism' to be seem

an

In other

essence'.4

can

be

Ghazali

cannot

shown shows

underscore

from no

1

seems

unknowability, align themselves the 'intellectual did not

having of points linkage speculative as to characterize for example, divinity ' the point of the philosophers insistence ? then be thought of (in quidditative terms) as having

words,

whatever

desire

some other

has

no

cause,

and

thus

needs

no

cause,

to enjoy a unique status. ontological to exploit to fact about this formal divinity of such a One the distinction from all that

the fact

alone

philosophically from it, and so elaborate originates the Islamic by philosophers. What

would

One

philosophically the emanationist demolished ladder, is be He discovered. content, might what alone has no cause, but misses that such a One

of those who

that suppose might him Ghazali left cold.3 Moreover, simply once to see how, minded enough

One.

unknowable

fact of divine

the formal

to us to be so natural

an alternative

metaphysics

a step for a thinker

clearly

to that offered did not present

ma'?n?asm?6 Allah al-Husn? (Beirut :Libraire Orientale, Fadlou Shehadi (ed.), alMaqsadal-asn??Sharh iv. inMcCarthy 1971), relevant portions (note 8), Appendix 2 Cf. Shehadi (note 1), pp. 101-14. 3 Gardet (note 3), pp. 153-96, esp. pp. 185-96. 4 8, pp. 180-92; van den Bergh, pp. 222 ff; also Shehadi Tah?f?t al-Fal?sifa (note 2), discussion (note 1, p. 1), pp. 41-2.

178 itself to Ghazali

as an

DAVID

B. BURRELL

it was a matter of constituencies, Perhaps have of their teachers. The at university, whose a soil offered different from the attended, origins Aquinas quite cathedral schools and monastic out of which oratories it had emerged. The roots have had its in Islamic but its in the west exercise disputatio may shar'ia, and

of the expectations

encouraged the process remains which

master

imperative. students

and pupil

of teaching/learning that he had available him

allowed

alike

to bold

was What forays of questioning.1 Ghazali The fact participated? scheme cosmological/psychological

like in which another

to affirm

the affinity of human understanding for things instinct not in the intellect but in the heart. divine, yet locate the homing in a heart which, And of its own urges desire and anger, purified notably to as would the divine in the particulars of this world. A respond imaged real world purified heart will readily read things in the world as ikons ofthat in which it is at home. Not unlike Augustine in the tenth book of noting, the Confessions the crucial of now book how said (after turning eight), things to him: 'we did not make ourselves'.2 If that be the programme, two questions can we arise. How spontaneously about the heart? That is answer al-Ghazali's and his go purifying question is the main of the Ihya'. The second question is ours: part of the program how

does

intellect

he know and

all

to know about that he pretends the heart and the in which our hearts would be at home? He would

the true world

to say: from the to have been That have is, it would Qur'an. since what we know by natural inclination is too simple and basic revealed, it would accurate to say: from those be more (in, b. 7, p. 21, B 209). Yet who have conformed their lives to the Qur'an. For such ones, there is a a of like to know-by-faith, which process authentication, way of coming us. confirms the existence of such a world its to direct This is presence by or taste the famous of which is dhawq things divine, self-authenticating be

likely

because assertions

it implies the presence about dhawq function

of

the real world

of

the malak?t.*

How

do

more

for Ghazali,

however, without claiming can only purport to be vehicles for self-becoming about do not compete reality. They certainly to delineate statements in attemping the structure of the

than they can sustain? They statements and not directly with

emanationist

are couched more to be. They of its coming in the language of invitation: take these steps and discover the outcome for yourself. Nowhere to link it with does he describe the world of the malak?t except the angels,

world

and

and present it as the goal and native home to the wayfarers to discover its geography. So 1

if God

be unknowable,

the way

to God

of the searching

heart.

It is up

is unchartable,

except

as a set

The Rise of Colleges (Edinburgh: Press, 1981 ), pp. 128 ff. George Makdisi, Edinburgh University cf.Wensinck, La pens?e... Confessions, Bk 10, ch. 6; on singular things and events as ikons for Ghazali, (note 9), pp. 90-7. 3W. Intellectual (Edinburgh: Watt, Muslim Montgomery Press, 1963), esp. his Edinburgh University critical remarks at pp. 168-9. 2

THE UNKNOWABILITY to set out

of invitations

OF GOD

IN AL-GHAZALI

I79

on a

of self-becoming, which defines our journey as other forms of may be, this knowledge one our we own are and the practical regards destiny, highest beings as any of those other the material world. Insofar forms of inhabiting to carry us to the same goal as this divine however, would purport knowledge, to a knowledge of God then we would be misled. knowing-cum-practice central

in life. As

task

useful

So philosophical in the measure that it would such a speculation, attempt would be But what about its the cogency of the thing, misguided. exploring claims on which the heart's journey rests? His answer here is a practical one, one the of to human It to is respecting capacities inquirers. thing respond the instincts of our hearts, and quite another to scrutinize the psychological and cosmological in describing claims made the heart's of trajectory. Most us are unable to do both at once. So best leave such analysis to the prophets, who are able to combine speculative inquiry with wholehearted personal are since fortified by the 'holy spirit' response they (m, b. 7, p. 24, B 210). For the rest of us, such inquiry can only deflect us from the essential task to the Prophet. of following the way revealed So while the primacy of that task does not in principle to a efforts elaborate supplant speculative to it tends them in synthesis, philosophical discourage practice.

IV.

CRITICAL

AND

COMPARATIVE

PERSPECTIVES

So the upshot of God's into God and inquiry essential -

One

human from whom

for Ghazali, is to render speculative unknowability, the things of God effectively with the incompatible task of responding to the lure of the wholeheartedly all things derive. For such inquiry is bound to fall short

of its goal, and to the extent that it pretends to carry us to that goal, we will be misled can take us there. and diverted from setting out on the path which a Yet a wholehearted cannot be mindless one, so the discerning response to be at hand. of intellect needs So no one dare accuse power always - or or Kierkegaard, al-Ghazali Pascal for that matter of being anti intellectual. But others of us can, and some among us must to try explore the assertions we to undertake they do make by the light of reason. Were our hearts' desire would we not be inquiry without neglecting placing intellects that much more at the service of the heart? In Ghazali's case, did a picture of doing philosophy which deals only with necessities and so underestimates other forms of understanding, lead him to conflate a proper subordination of goals with a subordination in epistemic authority? One may to relate argue that the quest of the whole legitimately person oneself rightly to the cosmos outstrips reason the deliverances in specified of that

our

ways, 1

without

Cf. Diogenes 198.).

calling Allen,

its proper

Three Outsiders:

Pascal,

authority Kierkegaard,

into

question.1

Simone Weil

Furthermore,

(Cambridge,

MA:

Cowley,

18o

DAVID

B. BURRELL

it served his purposes. Yet himself deftly employed where argument own if his of the task of philosophical understanding inquiry had been shaped reason in the view of the cosmic emanation scheme, by speculative displayed

Ghazali

to the personal task of rightly creation as emanation from

inimical that enterprise would appear certainly to creator. one's For oneself conceiving relating of necessary the First by way consequence

could only compromise the all things come. So the mode of rational was modelled could not be a reliable guide

of the One

transcendence

from whom

emanation inquiry after which a in one's quest for right understanding

in order

to respond

rightly

to divine

demands.

Were

philosophical of proceeding

manner

-

inquiry

of a more

supple and analogous own its limitations and in

capable

say, in acknowledging a transcendent that into a way of understanding turning acknowledgement a reason an to then such could be directed the heart reality by inquiry into as as a faithful in existence itself well assist the existential task of becoming servant

of the One.

God's

existence, with be compared he is more fruitfully

whose

as well as his effort to prove In his forays into theodicy did venture on that route.1 In that respect, he may to reason, Thomas But in his overall attitude Aquinas.

Ghazali

with

considered

characteristic had

Aquinas

his

much Avicenna, was But Ghazali

strategies own struggles of itmasquerading

Augustine, reason employed

Bonaventure, to show up

and Pascal, its limitations.

a to beholden heavily philosophy as a developing of Augustine's thought.2 to that current of thought, which also assumed

too close

with

for him the form of an opposing camp. As a result, he did his best to master an in the Maq?sid, and chose summation of its findings offered it, exquisite reason reason to and intellect and heart, the route of practical bring together faith. One

presented. its pretenses Islamic

result ofthat

unforeseen

of this exploratory I have already So much would

inquiry. noted how

choice

can supply

a controversial

upshot

a picture the emanation scheme powerful that the very one who effectively demolished to offer a substitute for it in his more natively

so, indeed, turn around

similar may be said of Aquinas, (Something in the act of created any participation against

of the malak?t.

picture

who

consistently argued on the speculative can be found nonetheless creation, yet who relying to account for God's action in the world.3) framework supplied by Avicenna one and less textually a more now It is radical supportable. My suggestion reason on assessment tone treatment Ghazali's of the of of one's relies rather 1 see S. de Beaurecueil and venture into proving God's existence, For a critical assessment of Ghazali's = et S. Thomas', MIDEO 'Une preuve de l'existence de Dieu chez Ghazzali G. C. Anawati, ( Melanges see Ormsby ni (1956), 207 58; for Ghazali's des Etudes Orientales), de l'Institut Dominicain theodicy, (note i, p. 11). 2 Cf. E. Gilson,

'Pourquoi

5~I27 3 See B. J. Lonergan,

S. Thomas

a critiqu?

Grace and Freedom

(London:

S. Augustin', Darton,

Archives a"hist doct. litt, duM-A, Longman

and Todd,

1971 ), p. 98.

1 (1926),

THE UNKNOWABILITY

OF GOD

IN AL-GHAZALI

l8l

I take to be a stringent and it regards what desire, It is as though the heart must become more of that desire.

the heart's

serving

intellectualizing

and more like the intellect, as intellect (in its highest meaning and function) is subsumed

into heart.

Then

role of intellect

to eschew

the exploiting en revanche, so would, to ape a more the affections

decision

Ghazali's

meant

that those functions

speculative as to crowd out response shape the heart's That is an evocative intellectual synthesis. assessment of the cerebral character of his quite

on my based observation, on the heart's effusive writing

turn is his characteristic way of dealing and Aristotle's (ghadab) concupiscible as though the personal task irascible appetites (in, b. 3, pp. 8-9, M 72). It is as well. must take on the character of an intellectual God's synthesis as the is only accessible since divinity will then be protected, unknowability but that process itself will (and transformation), goal of a personal becoming

index ofthat cerebral response. One with desire (shahwa) and with anger

so as

be described

associates

to it a greater as affections

to attribute with

degree of knowing than one are suffused with light !For Ghazali's o? heart leads them to mistrust

the heart,

normally this intellectualizing some, indeed, directions towards a religious-mystical of an authentic seeker on that way. In

any

case,

the main

lines

way,

of

as lacking

al-Ghazali's an

the intrinsic

account

of

authority

the

essential

to that appropriate that 'God is a being necessarily ' of Himself al-wujud bi-dhatihi) existing (Maqsad 47, (al-mawjud al-wajib M 342-3), it should be clear that this 'peculiar divine property belongs only that anyone cit is inconceivable to God and only God knows it'. Moreover of God, unknowability together are clear situation, enough. Given

with

response

the fact

like, since He has no like, no other knows it'. On such an account, (ibid.). So the resources of 'only God knows God' or utter distinction tawhid: the of the confirm God's uniqueness philosophy which does the exercise of which is possible', One from all else: 'everything know

it save Him

in fact

exist

perfection' can account no rational

or one who

isHis

to the best ways of order and 'according Since nothing but God's creative power (Maqsad 47, M 342).1 ' in itself in fact exists, however, is possible for the fact that what that divinely scheme can hope to penetrate bestowed order and from

that One

perfection. the emanation scheme with its pretended destroyed to must from Ghazali existence, necessary bridge contingent on to access nature know the of and the pretense divinity, rely the 'names of God'. This allows him two routes: the manifestly Having

conceptual eschew any provided

by

inadequate

one of comparing divine with human and the clearly attributes, impossible one of identification to oneself. with divinity those attributes by assimilating Ghazali to examines the of way identification, carefully alluding al-Hallaj 1 See Eric L. Princeton University Press, 1984) for a Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought (Princeton: 'best of all possible worlds'. and illuminating of the dispute over al-Ghazali's presentation

thorough

l82

DAVID

am the Truth' an attribute ('I and citing Abu Yazid (al-Bistami) off its skin: then I looked, and such assertions Strictly speaking,

BURRELL

reserved for God, who alone is true/real) ' : I sloughed off myself as the snake sloughs I am He!' behold, 166, M 357). (Maqsad

can only be false, for 'a speaker's assertion ' is a statement which is self-contradictory but out of respect for the speakers Ghazali allows them

that the creature

the Lord

becomes

164, M 356), license and excuses

(Maqsad a poetic

B.

them as uttered

under

the

of ecstatic

'influence

the fact that the (Maqsad 168, M 358). But that simply underscores rapture' ' a creature of is for and closed to all way immediacy something impossible names can do no save God' us with the which (Maqsad 53, M 344), leaving more than suggest what God is like, since they name attributes of this One

inaccessible

whose

do not know Him' He

insists

forbidden

that

therein,

theorems, together cannot comprehend

(aWaraf?n, a Sufi allusion)

knowers'

(Maqsad the names

know

'that

they

54, M 344). of God, licensed

or at least not by the Qur'an a in but the relevant God, signify reality philosophical warn us that we the experience of'the with knowers', how (la b?l-kaifa) those features qualify divinity. So our

cannot tell us anything about God (Maqsad 192-6). But as lures for us, inviting us to become ever more merciful, us a to and just, thus calling which of admits perfection

use of these names they can function compassionate, countless degrees

and

of the journey closed, of whomever demanded comes, we

can

the more invoke

If the progress. assimilation ever-increasing

road

to come

God.

unending

desires

one experiences

God's

names

to know

the difference

the more

is

identification

For

one and

testify),

we

acutely

but

only open the closer

(as 'the knowers' the more

surely,

of

is not

realize

that

our conception cannot be a sure guide to its reality in question of the attribute in God rule enjoins upon would-be 192-6). This (Maqsad epistemological accom? so Ghazali's of the Ihy?\ celebrated the journey knowers of God the way of conventional the Sufi mystical of aligning path with plishment If of the speculative his resolution is Muslim (or clearly displayed. practice to that than to that of of Moses Maimonides issues is closer theological) I have tried to suggest why. Aquinas, these three religious the conviction human respecting between necessary

reason

should

their the One corollary

Yet

such differences

thinkers

shared:

in whatever

be

should

the resources

that

one

ways employed to display the incommensurable integrity, and all else that exists. The unknowability of a shared

belief

in the universe

not obscure

as God's

of

can, always 'distinction' of God gracious

is a gift.1

1 For Maimonides' see my and Aquinas' divide, they manifestly deeper unity on this issue where 'the Immanuel xvi (1983), 70-85. On about Proper Speech', A Conversation 'Aquinas and Maimonides: of Notre Dame IN: University see Robert God of Faith and Reason (Notre Dame, Sokolowski, distinction', in to Fadlou Shehadi for alerting me to the ambiguities present Press, grateful 1982). I am especially our discussion uses of 'aql, and have tried to incorporate into my text. James Kritzeck Ghazali's many and cultural howlers. On also helped me avoid some historical ability, see my Knowing theUnknowable God: Ibn-Sina, Maimonides, of Notre Dame Press, 1986).

issue of God's unknow? the underlying IN: University (Notre Dame, Aquinas