270 | Ghazālī, Abū Ḥ āmid al-
and had intended to remedy the weakness ater
he had inally settled back in ηĐs.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by Abū H. āmid al-Ghazālī
IͰy»ˌ ˍulĐm al-dÜn [Reviviication of the Islamic Sci-
ences]. 4 vols. Istanbul: D»r al-Daˍwa, 1985.
al-Munqidh min al-͘al»l [he Deliverer from Error].
Edited by JamÜl έalÜb» and K»mil ˍAyy»d. Damacus:
Maktab al-Nashr al-ˍArabÜ, 1939; reprinted Beirut:
D»r al-Andalus, 1981. English translation: he Faith
and Practice of al-Ghazálí. Translated by W. Mont-
gomery Watt. London: Allen and Unwin, 1953; re-
printed Oxford: Oneworld, 2000.
al-Mustaήf» min ˍilm al-uήĐl [A Clear Exposition of
Islamic Legal heory]. 2 vols. Cairo: Al-Maθbaˍa al-
AmÜriyya, 1904–1906.
Tah»fut al-fal»sifah [he Incoherence of the Phi-
losophers]. Edited by Maurice Bouyges. Beirut:
Imprimerie Catholique, 1927. (Author and title in
Bouyges edition are Algazel, Tahafot al-Falasifat.)
English translation: he Incoherence of the Philoso-
phers = Tah»fut al-fal»sifah: A Parallel Enlish-Arabic
Text. Translated, introduced, and annotated by
Michael E. Marmura. Provo, Ut.: Brigham Young
University Press, 1997.
Secondary Works
Algar, Hamid. Imam Abu Hamid Ghazali: An Exponent
of Islam in Its Totality. Oneonta, N.Y.: Islamic Publi-
cations International, 2001.
Campanini, Massimo. “Al-Ghazz»lÜ.” In History of Is-
lamic Philosophy, edited by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
and Oliver Leaman. 2 vols., vol. 1, pp. 258–274.
London: Routledge, 1996.
Fakhry, Majid. A History of Islamic Philosophy. 2d ed.
New York: Columbia University Press; London:
Longman, 1983.
Ibn TaymÜyah, TaqÜ al-DÜn AͰmad. Darˌ taˍ»ru͘ al-ˍaql
wa-al-naql [Refutation of the Charge of Clash Be-
tween Reason and Transmitted Knowledge]. Edited
by MuͰammad Rash»d S»lim. 11 vols. Riyadh: Im»m
MuͰammad ibn SaĐd Islamic University, 1979–
1983.
Iqbal, Muhammad. he Reconstruction of Religious
hought in Islam. Lahore: Iqbal Academy Pakistan
and the Institute of Islamic Culture, 1989.
MawdĐdÜ, AbĐ l-Aˍl». TajdÜd-o-iͰy»ˌ-i dÜn [Renewal
and Revival of Islam]. Lahore: Islamic Publications,
1984.
Moosa, Ebrahim. Ghaz»lÜ and the Poetics of Imagina-
tion. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,
2005.
Ormsby, Eric. Ghazali: he Revival of Islam. Oxford:
Oneworld, 2008.
Saeed, Sheikh. “Al-Ghaz»lÜ: Metaphysics.” In A History
of Muslim Philosophy with Short Accounts of Other
Disciplines and the Modern Renaissance in Muslim
Lands, edited by M. M. Sharif. 2 vols. Wiesbaden,
Germany: Harrassowitz, 1963.
Sherif, Mohamed Ahmed. Ghaz»lÜ’s heory of Virtue.
Albany: State University of New York Press, 1975.
Mustansir Mir
Ghazālī, Aḥ mad al- (b. c. 1061, d. 1123
or 1126), έĐfÜ shaykh, writer, and inluential
preacher. Al-Ghaz»lÜ, Majd al-DÜn Abuˌl-FutĐͰ
AͰmad, ibn MuͰammad ibn AͰmad, was the
younger brother of the inluential jurist, theolo-
gian, and έĐfÜ AbĐ ͯ»mid MuͰammad al-Ghaz»lÜ
(d. 1111). He was born in Tabaran, a village close
to the city of Tus near present-day Mashhad in
Khurasan. He most likely followed the same
course of study in the Islamic sciences as his more
famous brother, but was also attracted to Suism
in his youth, and is recorded as a disciple of both
AbĐ ˍAlÜ al-F»rmadhÜ (d. 1084) and AbĐ Bakr al-
Nass»j al-ηĐsÜ (d. 1094). From the latter inherited
the έĐfÜ mantle and title of shaykh (“master”).
According to several sources, AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ
was the primary catalyst for the spiritual crisis
that led to AbĐ ͯ»mid al-Ghaz»lÜ’s conversion to
Suism. Before he let the NiϘ»mÜyah madrasah
in Baghdad, AbĐ ͯ»mid arranged for AͰmad to
teach in his place, which he did for a period of six
months. It is also reported that AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ
taught at the T»jÜyah madrasah in Baghdad.
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ traveled extensively, preach-
ing in many towns and villages and calling people

to remember and worship God. Despite an itin-
erant lifestyle, repeatedly visiting places such as
TabrÜz, Nishapur, Mar»gheh, Hamad»n, and Isfa-
han, it appears that he did not travel very widely,
having ventured no further than Baghdad to
the south and west, no further than TabrÜz to the
north, and no further than his native region of
Khurasan in the east. During his journeys, he is
said to have provided spiritual counsel to many,
among them the Seljuk ruler MughÜth ad-DÜn al-
MaͰmĐd (1118–1131), who ruled Iraq and western
Persia, and his brother AͰmad Sanjar (1119–1157),
who ruled Khurasan and northern Persia. AͰmad
al-Ghaz»lÜ also had many disciples, as the most
famous being ˍAyn al-Qu͘»t al-Hamad»nÜ (d.
1131) and Abuˌl-NajÜb al-SuhrawardÜ (d. 1168),
who were to have an extensive inluence on έĐfÜ
life and thought. AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ is also found
in the initiatic chains (silsilah) of several έĐfÜ
orders, such as the SuhrawardÜyah, KubrawÜyah,
MawlawÜyah, Niˍmatall»hÜyah, and DhahabÜyah.
He died in QazvÜn, where his tomb was at irst
located just outside the city. During the έafavid
period, Sh»h ˍAbb»s (1587–1629) expressed dis-
satisfaction with the location of al-Ghaz»lÜ’s tomb.
A new tomb was thus constructed within the city
and several murÜds (seekers) of a silsilah con-
nected to al-Ghaz»lÜ transferred the remains. he
tomb remains to this day in a small mosque
named the AͰmadÜ Mosque.
Although he was learned in both theology and
jurisprudence, AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ’s life and work
were devoted to Suism. He is best known for his
teachings on love, found in his most famous trea-
tise, Saw»niͰ (Inspirations). Comprising some
seventy-seven short chapters, this concise treatise
is an innovative composition wherein allusive
prose is interspersed with poetry, some borrowed
and some of the author’s own composition. he
same technique was used a century and a half
later by SaˍdÜ (d. 1294) in his Gulest»n and by
Fakhr al-DÜn al-ˍIr»qÜ (d. 1289) in his Lamaˍ»t
Ghazālī, Aḥ mad al- | 271
(Flashes); the latter of which states explicitly that
the author incorporates the style of the Saw»niͰ.
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ’s conception of language re-
veals a crucial divide between the forms (ήuwar)
of the words and their meanings or realities
(maˍ»nÜ). On the one hand, there is “allusion of an
outward expression” (ish»rat-i ˍib»rat) in which
a seemingly straightforward citation alludes to
many layers of inner meaning, such that the true
meaning may be veiled by an apparent meaning.
On the other hand, there is the “outward expres-
sion of an allusion” (ˍib»rat-i ish»rat) in which
a spiritual reality is given direct expression in
simple terms such that the direct message may be
obscured by overanalysis. As much as words, ex-
pressions, and allusions may be a support that
moves the spiritual wayfarer toward the witness-
ing of higher realities, it is only by inner vision
(baήÜrah) that one can pierce the forms and thus
attain the realities that they convey: “In the hearts
of words lie the edges of a sword which cannot be
seen except by inner vision (baήÜrat-i b»θinÜ)”
(Saw»niͰ, 2).
In the Saw»niͰ, love has two beginnings: one
within creation and one before creation. Its be-
ginning within the world of creation is the move-
ment of the spiritual wayfarer toward the beloved
on the spiritual path. Its beginning before crea-
tion is God’s love for the human being, which is
also the source and essence of the human being’s
love for God. From the perspective of spiritual
wayfaring, the human being is the lover, but from
the perspective of the pre-temporal love of God,
the human being is the beloved. he human being
as the locus of God’s love is what distinguishes
him from all else: “he special character of the
human being is this; is it not enough that he is be-
loved before he is a lover? his is no small virtue.”
Al-Ghaz»lÜ maintains that this pre-temporal state
of being beloved is what is referred to in the
Qurˌ»nic verse 5:57, “He loves them and they love
Him.” AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ and many who follow
272 | Ghazālī, Aḥ mad al-
in this school of love explain love through ref-
erence to the Qurˌ»nic story of mankind’s pre-
temporal covenant with God made while all
mankind was still in Adam’s loins. God’s saying
on this day, “Am I not your Lord” (7:172), was a
manifestation of His love for mankind and man-
kind’s response “Yea!” was the irst expression of
his love for God. From this perspective, only
through God’s making the human being beloved
did the human being become a lover, and all of
the human being’s love and striving for God orig-
inates from God’s pre-temporal love for the
human being. Ultimately, the human being’s love
for God is the self-same Love that God has for the
human being. Although the human being’s love
inds expression in the temporal order, its origin
is pre-temporal and its goal is post-temporal.
he two aspects or directions of love could be
described as the ontological and soteriological re-
lationship with God. Love is the essence of God
and the substance from which all else is woven.
Every existent thing is a self-disclosure (tajallÜ)
of the Divine, what al-Ghaz»lÜ refers to in the
Saw»niͰ as “a glance from loveliness” (kirishmeh-
i Ͱusn): “he secret face of everything is the point
of its connection, and a sign hidden in creation,
and beauty is the brand of creation. he secret of
the face is that face that faces love” (Saw»niͰ, 12).
As love is the true essence of all creation, the real-
ization of love is neither an emotion nor a senti-
ment, but the natural response of one’s being to
God, and its locus is the heart, which “has been
created for love and being a lover and knows
nothing else” (Saw»niͰ, 44). he spiritual path is
thus a subtle interplay of love in which the spir-
itual seeker is a lover who comes to realize his
true identity as a locus for the beloved’s love of
himself. It comprises degrees of love wherein one
ultimately transcends the duality of lover and
beloved to arrive at Love itself. he beloved is not
the Absolute, as in the poetry and prose of the
previous έĐfÜs, such as R»biˍah al-ˍAdawÜyah
(d. 801); rather, the beloved is here, considered to
be the God of beliefs that serves as a locus of spir-
itual aspiration for one traveling the path, but
must be transcended in order to advance to the
Divine Essence from which both the lover and
beloved are derived: “he derivation of the lover
and the beloved is from Love. When the acciden-
talities of derivations arise, the afair is again dis-
solved in the oneness of its reality” (Saw»niͰ, 4).
hus from the point of view of Love Itself, “he
lover and the beloved are both other, just like
strangers,” (Saw»niͰ, 4) and have always been so,
for they are necessarily marked by the stain of
duality.
To explain the role of love in the spiritual path,
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ sometimes employs in the
Saw»niͰ the metaphor of a bird and its journey.
his metaphor also serves as the basis of his short
Persian treatise Dast»n-i murgh»n (he Treatise
of the Birds; Ar. Ris»lat al-θuyĐr), which was later
reworked by FarÜd ad-DÜn ˍAθθ»r (d. 1230) in his
famous Conference of the Birds (Manθiq al-θayr).
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ wrote a number of other short
Persian treatises, the most famous of which is the
ˍAyniyyeh. he allusive style of this epistle is sim-
ilar to the Arabic sermons preserved in AͰmad
al-Ghaz»lÜ’s Maj»lis (Sessions). Both combine quo-
tations from the Qurˌ»n and ͰadÜth with sayings
of famous έĐfÜ masters interspersed with poetic
citations, some borrowed and some of al-Ghaz»lÜ’s
own composition. A central theme in all these
writings is the transience of life, and the need to
tear oneself away from the web of desires and il-
lusions that characterize much of our journey
through this world. his theme is also prevalent
in nine Persian letters, most addressed to ˍAyn al-
Qu͘»t Hamad»nÜ, letters that also provide private
spiritual instruction.
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ’s teachings regarding love
let a profound mark on the development of Per-
sian έĐfÜ literature. Many of the topoi, themes,
and images employed by later poets, such as ˍAθθ»r,

SaˍdÜ, ˍIr»qÜ, RĐmÜ, and ͯ»iϘ, can be traced to
AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ’s works, especially the Saw»niͰ,
where one inds human love for God being a man-
ifestation of God’s love for Himself; a mystical in-
terpretation for features of the beloved’s face, such
as the eyes and the eyebrows; the lover enslaved
to the dust in the quarter of the beloved; wine as
a symbol of love (ˍishq); the idea of the world-
displaying cup, the spiritual symbolism of light;
and much more.
Among al-Ghaz»lÜ’s Arabic works, there is a
collection of sessions (maj»lis) he conducted in
Arabic while in Baghdad, compiled by a certain
SaˍÜd ibn F»ris al-Labb»nÜ, in four volumes and
al-TajrÜd fÜ kalimat al-tawͰÜd (Excursus Regarding
the Expression of Unity), a treatise on the levels
of spiritual development and the corresponding
modes of remembrance (dhikr), which for al-
Ghaz»lÜ and most έĐfÜs before and ater him is the
central axis of the spiritual life and practice. In
the some 25 percent of the sessions that survive,
love features less prominently. Topics discussed
include the levels and degrees of gnosis, the qual-
ity of IblÜs as a true lover of God, and the centrality
of the remembrance of God. Al-TajrÜd fÜ kalimat
al-tawͰÜd outlines what was most likely the meth-
od of remembrance al-Ghaz»lÜ practiced and pro-
vides his views on sainthood (wil»yah), the quali-
ications for being a spiritual guide (murshid), and
other issues central to the έĐfÜ way. He envisions
three way stations for the spiritual adept: he irst
is the world of annihilation (fan»ˌ) in which one’s
blameworthy attributes predominate and one
should invoke “No god, but God.” hen in the
world of attraction (jadhabÜyah), the praiseworthy
attributes predominate and one should invoke the
name All»h. In the third world, the world of pos-
session (qab͘), praiseworthy attributes have van-
quished the blameworthy and one invokes Huwa,
Huwa (He, He), subsisting in God.
Among AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ’s extant works, there
is also Lub»b al-iͰy»ˌ (he Quintessence of the
Ghazālī, Aḥ mad al- | 273
Revival), a brief summary of the IͰy»ˌ ˍulĐm ad-
dÜn of his brother, comprised entirely of Qurˌ»nic
verses, aͰ»dÜth, and sayings extracted from the
IͰy»ˌ. It can hardly be considered an original work
and is not representative of his thought. he attri-
bution of a number of other works to AͰmad al-
Ghaz»lÜ is incorrect. hese include the Persian
BaͰr al-ͰaqÜqa, and the Arabic Baw»riq al-ilm»ˍ
and Sirr al-asr»r f Ü kashf al-anw»r. A commentary
on chapter 12 of the Qurˌ»n, “Joseph,” entitled
BaͰr al-maͰabbah f Ü asr»r al-mawaddah f Ü tafsÜr
sĐrat YĐsuf (he Ocean of Love Regarding the Se-
crets of Afection: A Commentary on SĐrat YĐsuf)
is attributed to AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ, but accounting
for the style of composition and given that the ear-
liest extant manuscript dates to 1523, this attribu-
tion is most likely incorrect. All the other Arabic
works attributed to him are most likely by the
same author of Sirr al-asr»r, one AͰmad. ibn Mu-
hammad aθ-ηĐsÜ, who likely lived some 120 years
ater AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lumbard, Joseph. “AͰmad al-Ghaz»lÜ and the Meta-
physics of Love.” PhD diss., Yale University, New
Haven, CT, 2003.
Lumbard, Joseph. “From ͯubb to ˍIshq: he Develop-
ment of Love in Early Suism.” Oxford Journal of
Islamic Studies 18, no. 2 (April 2008): 345–385.
Muj»hid, AͰmad. MajmĐˍah-ˌi »s»r-i F»rsÜ-i AͰmad
Ghaz»lÜ. 2d ed. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Dānishgāh-i
Tehran, 1991.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. “Ahmed et Mohammad al-Ghazali:
Inluence reciproque.” In Ghazali: La raison et le miracle,
Table ronde UNESCO, 9–10 décembre 1985, pp. 163–168.
Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 1987.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. “ˍºlam-i ΀ayy»l az naϘr-i
AͰmad ͫaz»lÜ.” Maˍ»ref 3, no. 2 (1986): 3–54.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. “Metaphysik der Liebe: Der
Suismus des Ahmad al-Gazzali.” Spektrum Iran 3,
no. 1 (1990): 45–72.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. Saw»niͰ: Inspirations from the
World of Pure Spirits. he Oldest Persian Sui Treatise
on Love. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986.
274 | Ghazālī, Aḥ mad al-
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. “Selhood and Time in the
Suism of Ahmad Ghazzali.” Sophia Perennis 4, no. 2
(1981): 32–37.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah. Sulθ»n-i θarÜqat: Saw»niͰ-i
zendagÜ wa šarͰ-i »t»r-i AͰmad Ghaz»lÜ. Tehran:
Āgāh, (1358), 1979.
Utas, Bo. “ ‘Ambiguity’ in the Savanih of Ahmad Ghaz-
ali.” In Proceedings of the Second European Confer-
ence of Iranian Studies, edited by Bert G. Fragner
et al., pp. 701–710. Rome: Istituto italiano per il
Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1995.
Joseph B. Lumbard
God, Proofs for the Existence
of. Proofs of the existence of God are fre-
quently found in Islam, starting with the Qurˌ»n
itself.
he Qurʾān. he most signiicant of these
proofs is that there is a God who created the world,
just one God, and we can discover this by observ-
ing the world and contemplating it. In 21:22, we
are told that if more than one God existed, the
heavens and earth would be corrupted, presum-
ably because diferent gods would all be taking
diferent and uncoordinated actions. 6:75–78 pro-
vides an account of Abraham’s thinking when he
watches the planets and says they are variously
“My Lord,” revising his statements all the while as
their lights wax and wane. Even the sun proves to
be insuicient, and one way of interpreting the ac-
count is that Abraham concludes the cause of the
world cannot be in it: he world cannot be some-
thing that is associated with other physical things,
but must be some being that is behind everything
which happens. his leads him to monotheism
and the particular type of monotheism put for-
ward in the Qurˌ»n, although some commentaries
ofer a diferent motivation for Abraham’s words
and do not attribute such thought processes to a
prophet in accordance with Islamic beliefs.
he most common argument stems from the
Qurˌ»n and is some version of the cosmological
argument, which moves from the existence of the
world to an ultimate cause, where this series of
events cannot proceed indeinitely and must stop at
a irst cause, God the creator. Another argument is
broadly called ontological and argues that because
we can conceive of a God that is in our minds and is
the greatest being that can be conceived of, either it
exists only in thought or also in reality, but since the
latter is a superior existence or possibility to the
former, this “greatest being” must exist in thought
and in reality as well as in thought. hen there are
arguments broadly from design, which it in well
with the Qurˌ»n, where we observe all the wonderful
complexity and harmony of creation and conclude
that a supremely powerful, kind, and wise creator is
behind it all. Finally, proofs exist that are based on
personal spiritual experience. Some arguments
combine more than one of these types of proof.
One of the most energetic sources of proofs for
the existence of God is Ibn SÜn» (Avicenna), who
created a rich ontological vocabulary based very
much on the pioneering work of al-F»r»bÜ. Ibn
SÜn» produced a variety of types of argument for
the existence of God. He distinguishes between
two kinds of existence: the necessary (w»jib) and
the merely possible or contingent (mumkin), and
points out that something which is contingent re-
quires something else to bring it into existence. If
only contingent, then something must happen to
move it from just being contingent or possible to
being actual. Not everything can be contingent in
the sense of depending on something else to bring
it into existence. To avoid ininite regress, there
has to be something that is more than possible
and is actually necessary, which would be at the
basis of the whole series of existing things and
move that series from possibility to actuality.
here must be an ultimate cause, the one thing
that brings everything into existence and does
not itself require anything to bring it into exist-
ence, a being which necessitates its own existence
and does not require a cause. If we conceive of a