1001Philosophers

Al-Ghazali vs Averroes

Al-Ghazali and Averroes are the two great medieval Islamic philosophers whose dispute over the legitimacy of Greek-influenced philosophy shaped the trajectory of Islamic thought. Their works The Incoherence of the Philosophers (Al-Ghazali) and The Incoherence of the Incoherence (Averroes' point-by-point reply) frame the dispute.

Key differences at a glance

Al-GhazaliAverroes
Status of Greek philosophy Several Aristotelian doctrines amount to unbelief. Properly interpreted, Aristotelian philosophy is consistent with Islam.
Natural causation Occasionalism: God is the direct cause of every event. Genuine secondary causation operates within God's order.
Eternity of the world An impermissible doctrine to be rejected. A defensible Aristotelian position properly understood.

Biographical facts

Al-GhazaliAverroes
Dates1058 – 11111126 – 1198
NationalityPersianAndalusian
EraMedievalMedieval
Movements Medieval Philosophy, Islamic Philosophy Medieval Philosophy, Islamic Philosophy
Profile Al-Ghazali → Averroes →

Where they agree

Both held that the Quran is the highest source of truth, both were trained jurists, and both engaged seriously with the Greek philosophical tradition transmitted to the Islamic world by Al-Farabi and Avicenna. Both treated the integration of revelation and rational inquiry as a central task.

Where they disagree

Al-Ghazali argued that the falasifa, the Aristotelian-Neoplatonic philosophers, had committed several errors so serious that holding them constituted unbelief: the eternity of the world, the denial of God's knowledge of particulars, and the denial of bodily resurrection. He further attacked the necessity of natural causation as such, defending a form of occasionalism. Averroes replied that the philosophers had been misrepresented and that properly interpreted Aristotelian philosophy is consistent with Islamic revelation, with both natural causation and the integrity of philosophical inquiry preserved.

Representative quotes

Al-Ghazali

  • “The man who makes his religion a means to the gaining of this world, will lose both worlds alike; whereas the man who gives up this world for the sake of religion, will get both worlds alike.”

    The Faith and Practice of Al-Ghazali , Allen & Unwin (1963), p. 152.

  • “There is no denying existence itself. Something must exist and anyone who says nothing exists at all makes a mockery of sense and necessity. The proposition that there is no denying being itself, then, is a necessary premise. Now this Being which has been admitted in principle is either necessary or contingent… What this means is that a being must be self-sufficient or dependent… From here we argu”

    Fada’ih al-Batiniyya. Edited by Abdurahman Badawi. Kuwait: Muasassa Dar al-Kutub al-Thiqafa (1964), p. 82.

  • “How can even the lowest mind, if he reflects at all the marvels of this earth and sky, the brilliant fashioning of plants and animals, remain blind to the fact that this wonderful world with its settled order must have a maker to design, determine and direct it?”

    Tibawi, A.L. (ed. and tr.). (1965) Al-Risala al-Qudsiyya (The Jerusalem Epistle) “Al-Ghazali's Tract on Dogmatic Theology”. In: The Islamic Quarterly, 9:3–4 (1965), 3-4.

Averroes

  • “Knowledge is the conformity of the object and the intellect.”

    Attributed to Averroes, in: John Bartlett (1968) Familiar Quotations . p. 155

  • “There is no city that is truly one other than this city that we [anahnti] are involved in bringing forth.”

    Averroes, Ralph Lerner (1974) Averroes On Plato's Republic . p. xxiv

  • “Averroes, Ralph Lerner (1974) Averroes On Plato's Republic . p. xxiv”

    There is no city that is truly one other than this city that we [anahnti] are involved in bringing forth.

Continue reading