Imam al-Ghazzali, the well-known author of the book 'Ihyaa Uloom ad-Deen', was a person of rare level of intelligence, ingenuity and cleverness.
He went through a number of stages. He indulged in philosophy, and then he recanted and rejected it. Then he indulged in Ilmul-Kalaam and gained a sound grasp of its basic principles and used it to refute philosophy; but later rejected Ilmul-Kalaam when it became clear to im that it was corrupt and filled with contradictions, he then followed the path of the Batiniyyah (esotericisms) and learned their knowledge, but rejected that too. He showed the beliefs of the Baatiniyyah to be false, and exposed the manner in which they tamper with the texts and rulings. Then he followed the path of Sufism. These are the four stages that al-Ghazzali went through.
Even though, al-Ghazzali had a deep knowledge of Sufism, Ilmul-Kalaam, Usool al-fiqh, etc., and he was a devoted worshiper with good intentions, he could not completely free himself from philosophy.
His closest companion, Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi refuted his ideas saying, "Our shaykh Abu Haamid went deep into philosophy then he wanted to come out of it but he was unable to. There were narrated from him opinions which sound like the Baatini way of speaking, and that may be verified by looking in al-Ghazzali's books."
Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (rahimahullah) said, "If we assume that someone narrated the view of the Salaf but what he narrated is far removed from what the view of the Salaf actually is, then he has little knowledge of the view of the Salaf, such as Abu'l-Ma'aali, Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, Ibn al-Khateeb and the like, who did not have enough knowledge of hadeeth to qualify them as ordinary scholars of hadeeth, let alone as prominent scholars in that field for none of these people had any knowledge of al-Bukharee and Muslim and their ahadeeth apart from what they heard, which is similar to the situation of the ordinary Muslim, who cannot distinguish between a hadeeth which is regarded as saheeh and mutawatir according to the scholars of hadeeth and a hadeeth which is fabricated and false. Their books bear witness to that because they contain strange things and most of these scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam and Sufis who have drifted away from the path of the Salaf admit that either at the time of death or before death. There are many such well known stories.
This Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, despite his brilliance, his devotion to Allah, his knowledge of kalaam and philosophy, his asceticism and spiritual practices and his Sufism ended up in a state of confusion and resorted to the path of those who claim to find out things through reams and spiritual methods."
[See Majmoo al-Fatawa, (4/66)]
[Majmoo al-Fatawa (4/71)]
Ibn Taymiyah also said,
"Hence, even though Abu Haamid refuted the philosophers and classed them as kuffar (disbelievers), and expressed veneration of Prophethood [as opposed to philosophy], etc., and even though some of what he says is true and good, and indeed of great benefit, nevertheless some of his writings contain philosophical material and matters where he followed the corrupt principles of philosophy that contradict Prophethood and even contradict sound common sense."
Adh-Dhahabi narrated in his book, that Muhammad ibn al-Waleed al-Tartooshi said, "…he became a Sufi and forsook knowledge and its people, then he got involved with 'inspiration' - those who claim to have spiritual knowledge and the insinuating whispers of the Shaytan. Then he mixed that with the views of the philosophers and the symbolic phrases of al-Hallaaj. He started to criticize the fuqaha (jurists) and the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam. He almost went astray from the religion altogether when he wrote al-Ihya [i.e., Ihya Uloom al-Deen]. He started to speak of the inspiration and symbolic words of the Sufis although he was not qualified to do that and had no deep knowledge of such atters. Hence he failed and filled his book with fabricated reports, "I (ad-Dhahabi) say, "as for al-Ihya, it contains many false ahadeeth and it contains much that is good. I wish that it did not contain etiquette, rituals and asceticism that are in accordance with the ways of the philosophers and deviant Sufis. We ask Allah for beneficial knowledge.
Do you know what beneficial knowledge is? It is that which Allah revealed in the Qur'aan, which was explained by the Messenger in word and deed, and the type of knowledge which we are not forbidden to acquire. The Prophet said, "Whoever turns away from my Sunnah does not belong to me." So, my brother, you must ponder over the Words of Allah and persist in studying al-Saheehayn (Saheeh al-Bukharee and Saheeh Muslim), Sunan al-Nasa'ee, Riyadh an-Nawawi and al-Adhkaar by an-Nawawi, and then you will succeed and prosper. Beware of the opinions of the philosophers, the practice of spiritual exercises, the starvation of monks, and the nonsense talk of those who stay alone for long periods in their monasteries. All goodness is to be found in following the pure and tolerant way of the haneefs. And seek the help of Allah. O Allah, guide us to Your straight path.”
At the end of his life, al-Ghazzali (rahimahullah) returned to the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah. He focused on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and condemned Ilmul-Kalaam and its proponents. He advised the Ummah to come back to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger , and to act in accordance with them as was the way of the Sahabah.
Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said, "After that he (al-Ghazzali) came back to the path of the scholars of hadeeth and wrote Iljaam al-Awwaam an Ilm al-Kalaam."
[Siyar A'laam an-Nubula (19/340]
[Majmoo (4/72)]
A glance at 'Iljaam al-Awwaam an Ilm al-Kalaam ' will prove to us that al-Ghazzali had indeed changed in many ways:
1. In this book he advocated the belief of the salaf and pointed out that the way of the salaf was the truth, and that whoever went against them was an innovator or follower of bidah.
2. He emphatically denounced ta'weel (interpretation of the Attributes of Allah in a manner that differs from their apparent meaning). He advocated affirming the Attributes of Allah and not misinterpreting them in a manner that would lead to denying the attributes of Allah.
3. He emphatically denounced the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam and described all their principles and standards as reprehensible innovations, which had harmed a great number of people and created trouble for the Muslims. Al-Ghazzali said, "The harm caused to a great number of people is something that has been seen, witnessed and experienced. The evil that has resulted since Ilmul-Kalaam began has become widespread, even though people at the time of the Sahabah forbade that. This is also indicated by the fact that the Messenger and the Sahabah, by consensus, did not follow the way of the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam when they produced arguments, evidence and analysis. That was not because they were incapable of doing so. If they had thought that it was something good, they would have done it in the best manner, and they would have studied the matter hard, more than they did with regard to the division of the estate among the heirs.”
“The Sahabah needed to prove the
Prophethood of Muhammad to the Jews and
Christians, but they did not add anything to
the evidence of the Qur'aan. They did not
resort to arguments or lay down philosophical
principles. That was because they knew that
doing so would provoke trouble and cause
confusion.
Whoever is not convinced by the
evidence of the Qur'aan will not be convinced
by anything other than that, for there is no
proof after the proof of Allah."
See Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali wa'l-Tasawwuf.
From Book: "A critical Analysis of The Modernists and The Hadith Rejecters (www.qsep.com)
He went through a number of stages. He indulged in philosophy, and then he recanted and rejected it. Then he indulged in Ilmul-Kalaam and gained a sound grasp of its basic principles and used it to refute philosophy; but later rejected Ilmul-Kalaam when it became clear to im that it was corrupt and filled with contradictions, he then followed the path of the Batiniyyah (esotericisms) and learned their knowledge, but rejected that too. He showed the beliefs of the Baatiniyyah to be false, and exposed the manner in which they tamper with the texts and rulings. Then he followed the path of Sufism. These are the four stages that al-Ghazzali went through.
Even though, al-Ghazzali had a deep knowledge of Sufism, Ilmul-Kalaam, Usool al-fiqh, etc., and he was a devoted worshiper with good intentions, he could not completely free himself from philosophy.
His closest companion, Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi refuted his ideas saying, "Our shaykh Abu Haamid went deep into philosophy then he wanted to come out of it but he was unable to. There were narrated from him opinions which sound like the Baatini way of speaking, and that may be verified by looking in al-Ghazzali's books."
Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (rahimahullah) said, "If we assume that someone narrated the view of the Salaf but what he narrated is far removed from what the view of the Salaf actually is, then he has little knowledge of the view of the Salaf, such as Abu'l-Ma'aali, Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, Ibn al-Khateeb and the like, who did not have enough knowledge of hadeeth to qualify them as ordinary scholars of hadeeth, let alone as prominent scholars in that field for none of these people had any knowledge of al-Bukharee and Muslim and their ahadeeth apart from what they heard, which is similar to the situation of the ordinary Muslim, who cannot distinguish between a hadeeth which is regarded as saheeh and mutawatir according to the scholars of hadeeth and a hadeeth which is fabricated and false. Their books bear witness to that because they contain strange things and most of these scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam and Sufis who have drifted away from the path of the Salaf admit that either at the time of death or before death. There are many such well known stories.
This Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, despite his brilliance, his devotion to Allah, his knowledge of kalaam and philosophy, his asceticism and spiritual practices and his Sufism ended up in a state of confusion and resorted to the path of those who claim to find out things through reams and spiritual methods."
[See Majmoo al-Fatawa, (4/66)]
[Majmoo al-Fatawa (4/71)]
Ibn Taymiyah also said,
"Hence, even though Abu Haamid refuted the philosophers and classed them as kuffar (disbelievers), and expressed veneration of Prophethood [as opposed to philosophy], etc., and even though some of what he says is true and good, and indeed of great benefit, nevertheless some of his writings contain philosophical material and matters where he followed the corrupt principles of philosophy that contradict Prophethood and even contradict sound common sense."
Adh-Dhahabi narrated in his book, that Muhammad ibn al-Waleed al-Tartooshi said, "…he became a Sufi and forsook knowledge and its people, then he got involved with 'inspiration' - those who claim to have spiritual knowledge and the insinuating whispers of the Shaytan. Then he mixed that with the views of the philosophers and the symbolic phrases of al-Hallaaj. He started to criticize the fuqaha (jurists) and the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam. He almost went astray from the religion altogether when he wrote al-Ihya [i.e., Ihya Uloom al-Deen]. He started to speak of the inspiration and symbolic words of the Sufis although he was not qualified to do that and had no deep knowledge of such atters. Hence he failed and filled his book with fabricated reports, "I (ad-Dhahabi) say, "as for al-Ihya, it contains many false ahadeeth and it contains much that is good. I wish that it did not contain etiquette, rituals and asceticism that are in accordance with the ways of the philosophers and deviant Sufis. We ask Allah for beneficial knowledge.
Do you know what beneficial knowledge is? It is that which Allah revealed in the Qur'aan, which was explained by the Messenger in word and deed, and the type of knowledge which we are not forbidden to acquire. The Prophet said, "Whoever turns away from my Sunnah does not belong to me." So, my brother, you must ponder over the Words of Allah and persist in studying al-Saheehayn (Saheeh al-Bukharee and Saheeh Muslim), Sunan al-Nasa'ee, Riyadh an-Nawawi and al-Adhkaar by an-Nawawi, and then you will succeed and prosper. Beware of the opinions of the philosophers, the practice of spiritual exercises, the starvation of monks, and the nonsense talk of those who stay alone for long periods in their monasteries. All goodness is to be found in following the pure and tolerant way of the haneefs. And seek the help of Allah. O Allah, guide us to Your straight path.”
At the end of his life, al-Ghazzali (rahimahullah) returned to the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah. He focused on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and condemned Ilmul-Kalaam and its proponents. He advised the Ummah to come back to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger , and to act in accordance with them as was the way of the Sahabah.
Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said, "After that he (al-Ghazzali) came back to the path of the scholars of hadeeth and wrote Iljaam al-Awwaam an Ilm al-Kalaam."
[Siyar A'laam an-Nubula (19/340]
[Majmoo (4/72)]
A glance at 'Iljaam al-Awwaam an Ilm al-Kalaam ' will prove to us that al-Ghazzali had indeed changed in many ways:
1. In this book he advocated the belief of the salaf and pointed out that the way of the salaf was the truth, and that whoever went against them was an innovator or follower of bidah.
2. He emphatically denounced ta'weel (interpretation of the Attributes of Allah in a manner that differs from their apparent meaning). He advocated affirming the Attributes of Allah and not misinterpreting them in a manner that would lead to denying the attributes of Allah.
3. He emphatically denounced the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam and described all their principles and standards as reprehensible innovations, which had harmed a great number of people and created trouble for the Muslims. Al-Ghazzali said, "The harm caused to a great number of people is something that has been seen, witnessed and experienced. The evil that has resulted since Ilmul-Kalaam began has become widespread, even though people at the time of the Sahabah forbade that. This is also indicated by the fact that the Messenger and the Sahabah, by consensus, did not follow the way of the scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam when they produced arguments, evidence and analysis. That was not because they were incapable of doing so. If they had thought that it was something good, they would have done it in the best manner, and they would have studied the matter hard, more than they did with regard to the division of the estate among the heirs.”
“The Sahabah needed to prove the
Prophethood of Muhammad to the Jews and
Christians, but they did not add anything to
the evidence of the Qur'aan. They did not
resort to arguments or lay down philosophical
principles. That was because they knew that
doing so would provoke trouble and cause
confusion.
Whoever is not convinced by the
evidence of the Qur'aan will not be convinced
by anything other than that, for there is no
proof after the proof of Allah."
See Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali wa'l-Tasawwuf.
From Book: "A critical Analysis of The Modernists and The Hadith Rejecters (www.qsep.com)
