ABSTRACT Despite the fact that Islam and Judaism are both monotheistic religions, they embrace dissimilar concepts of unity. The differences entail the emergence of theological and philosophical discourses among Muslim and Jewish scholars. Arguments on God s unity, incorporeality and His relation to creation thus result in debates on God s existence, attributes and actions. Hence, as part of bridging interfaith dialogue between Islam and Judaism, this study aims to provide a comparative analysis of al-ghazālī and Maimonides, both of whom were considered the principal spokespersons in their respective religions in the 11 th and 12 th centuries. Historical and textual analyses along with the comparative method are employed to examine their treatises. Al-Ghazālī s discussion on God was elaborated in Iḥyā Ulūm al-dīn (The Revival of Religious Sciences) and Al-Iqtiṣād fī al-i tiqād (Moderation in Belief). Maimonides extensively discussed God in Dalālat al-hāi rīn (The Guide of the Perplexed) and Mishneh Torah (The Repetition of Torah). The data from these texts was compared directly without referring to any theoretical stance such as kalām or philosophy, since the two scholars had different methods of argumenting. If kalām was employed in analyzing both arguments, it will be unjust towards Maimonides. On the other hand, if philosophy was employed, it will be unjust towards al-ghazālī. This study finds that both al-ghazālī and Maimonides believed that God possesses a necessary existence, but they contrasted in their underlying arguments where al-ghazālī only affirmed God to be the necessary existent. Maimonides advocated a dualistic approach to necessary existence. They both believed that the universe was created, but Maimonides additionally affirmed that it was created from eternal matter. Both scholars acknowledged God s will and particularization, but al-ghazālī believed it transcends every occurrence while Maimonides only related it to the arbitrariness of the spheres and supported necessary iii
causation in explaining contingencies. Al-Ghazālī asserted that God possesses attributes, while Maimonides absolutely refuted subscribing attributes to God s Essence. Finally, al-ghazālī held that God s will transcend His actions, whereas Maimonides subscribed to both will and providence in perceiving His actions. Apparently, their differences stem from their stances on incorporating philosophical arguments. In sum, it is observed that al-ghazālī acknowledged God as the Agent of Will, while Maimonides perceived God within the conception of the Intellect, Intelligen and Intelligible. iv
ABSTRAK Agama Islam dan Yahudi berpegang kepada konsep monoteisme namun keduaduanya adalah berbeza. Perbezaan ini membawa kepada perbincangan teologi dan falsafah di antara sarjana Islam dan Yahudi. Hujah tentang keesaan Tuhan, tidak berjasadnya Tuhan dan kaitan antara Tuhan dan ciptaannya membawa kepada perbincangan tentang konsep kewujudan, sifat dan perbuatan Tuhan. Oleh itu, sebagai satu langkah dialog antara Islam dan Yahudi, kajian ini bertujuan untuk menyediakan satu analisis perbandingan di antara al-ghazālī dan Maimonides di mana keduaduanya merupakan antara sarjana yang terulung pada abad ke 11 dan 12. Selain daripada metode perbandingan, kajian turut mengaplikasikan metode analisis sejarah dan analisis teks dalam meneliti penulisan mereka. Perbincangan al-ghazālī dinukilkan daripada kitab Iḥyā Ulūm al-dīn dan al-iqtiṣād fī al-i tiqād. Manakala perbincangan Maimonides pula dinukilkan dari kitabnya Dalālat al-hāi rīn dan Mishneh Torah. Analisis perbandingan daripada kesemua teks ini dilakukan tanpa berlandaskan kepada mana-mana teori seperti teori ilmu kalām mahupun falsafah. Ini kerana kedua-dua sarjana mempunyai teori dan metode hujjah yang berbeza. Seandainya teori ilmu kalam digunakan dalam menilai persepsi kedua-dua tokoh tersebut, pastilah berlaku ketidakadilan ilmu kepada Maimonides. Manakala jika justifikasi teori falsafah diaplikasikan, bererti ketidakadilan ilmu berlaku kepada al- Ghazālī. Hasil kajian mendapati bahawa al-ghazālī dan Maimonides mempercayai kewujudan Tuhan sebagai wājib al-wujūd. Pun begitu, wujud perbezaan pandangan antara mereka di mana al-ghazālī hanya mempercayai Tuhan sebagai satu-satu pemilik sifat wājib al-wujūd. Maimonides telah meletakkan dua kewujudan pada wājib al-wujūd. Kedua-dua sarjana ini berpendapat alam ini dicipta. Namun begitu, Maimonides berpendapat alam ini dicipta daripada zat yang qadim. Kedua-dua tokoh ini mengiktiraf kehendak Tuhan dan Tuhan sebagai murajjiḥ, namun berbeza v
pandangan. Al-Ghazālī percaya bahawa kehendak Tuhan berada pada setiap kejadian manakala Maimonides hanya meletakkan kehendak Tuhan dalam kejadian kosmologi dan meletakkan teori illah ma lūl dalam menerangkan tentang kejadian baru. Al- Ghazālī menetapkan Tuhan sebagai memiliki sifat. Maimonides pula dengan jelas menolak sifat untuk dihubungkait dengan zat Tuhan. Akhir sekali, al-ghazālī meletakkan kehendak dalam setiap perbuatan Tuhan. Manakala, Maimonides meletakkan kedua-dua konsep kehendak serta īnāyah Tuhan dalam memahami perbuatannya. Jelas bahawa perbezaan kedua-dua pendapat adalah berpunca daripada perbezaan kefahaman mereka terhadap pengharmonian antara falsafah dengan agama. Menurut al-ghazālī Tuhan adalah Tuhan yang berkehendak manakala Maimonides pula meletakkan Tuhan dalam konsep Aql, Aqil dan Ma qūl. vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Praise be to Allah, The Most Exalted, who has placed me on this intellectual journey, provided me peace and serenity in overcoming challenges, instilled perseverance in me and provided the means to complete this study. Unto Him belongs the highest praise and gratitude. I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger. I am deeply obliged to my supervisors Assoc. Prof. Dr. Khadijah Khambali@Hambali and Dr. Wan Adli Wan Ramli for their untiring and endless efforts in coaching me to complete this study. Their care and patience in supervising this study and correcting countless mistakes have helped me sharpen and refine this study to the point where I have confidence presenting it to the scholarly community. I am truly indebted to both of them and really appreciate their support and encouragement. I would also like to acknowledge with much appreciation the roles of the lecturers at the Department of Aqidah and Islamic Thought: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Che Zarrina Sa ari, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fauzi Hamat, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Wan Suhaimi Wan Abdullah, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Wan Zailan Kamaruddin, Dr. Faizuri Abd Latif, Dr. Syed Mohammad Hilmi Syed Abdul Rahman and Dr. Ali Saged for their constant support in encouraging students to pursue intellectual growth. They have certainly inspired me intellectually and spiritually to complete this research. I would also like to express my very special thanks to Dr. Azmil Zainal Abidin and Ustaz Ahmad Ridouddin Abdul Wahab who have helped me a lot in understanding the fundamental discourses of Kalam and provided me with fruitful comments to improve this study. My gratitude also extends to my fellow friends, especially Fairuz, Husna and Shahida who have been generous in sharing their insight apart from the endless motivation and support during my struggle in completing this study, and also friends in Singapore for their constant encouragement, and others who have directly or indirectly helped me overcome the difficult times. Thank you. Finally, my profound appreciation and gratitude to my parents Senin Supaat and Marliah Sulaiman for their infinite encouragement and support, my sisters Nuraishah and Nurhidayah and my brother in-law Dr. Feirul Maliq for their care, concern and comfort when I needed it the most. And to my other half, Mohd Faiz Muhamad, whose love and support have comforted me, especially towards the end of completing this study. Lastly to the apple of my eyes, El Wafi bin Mohd Faiz, your presence into this world during the final phase completes this study and me as a whole. Words of gratitude are not sufficed for their untiring patience, sacrifices and support over the years. This accomplishment would not have been possible without them. May Allah bless all of you with the best rewards! Nurhanisah binte Senin No 19, Jalan Widuri, Bukit Beruntung 3, 48300 Rawang, Selangor vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION FORM ABSTRACT ABSTRAK ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM LIST OF TABLES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS iii v vii viii xi xii xiii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Background of the Study 1 1.2 Questions of the Study 10 1.3 Objectives of the Study 10 1.4 Significance of the Study 10 1.5 Scope of the Study 13 1.6 Justification of Choosing the Scholars 15 1.7 Literature Review 20 1.7.1 Al-Ghazali 26 1.7.2 Maimonides 30 1.8 Methodology of the Study 34 1.9 Structure of Chapters 38 CHAPTER 2 AL-GHAZĀLĪ AND MAIMONIDES: BACKGROUND AND SCHOLARSHIP 2.0 Introduction 41 2.1 Al-Ghazālī s Background and Scholarship 41 2.1.1 Biographical Sketch of al-ghazālī 41 2.1.2 Background of al-ghazālī 45 2.1.3 Al-Ghazālī s Theological Stance 50 2.2 Maimonides Background and Scholarship 54 2.2.1 Biographical Sketch of Maimonides 54 2.2.2 Background of Maimonides 57 2.2.3 Maimonides Theological Stance 63 2.3 Concluding Remarks 69 CHAPTER 3 THE EXISTENCE OF GOD AND ANTHROPOMORPHISM ACCORDING TO AL-GHAZĀLĪ AND MAIMONIDES 3.0 Introduction 72 3.1 The Existence of God According to al-ghazālī 73 3.1.1 Proofs of God s Existence 73 3.1.2 The Cosmological Argument 77 3.1.3 Al-Ghazālī on Causality 79 3.1.4 The Particularization Argument 87 viii
3.2 The Existence of God According to Maimonides 92 3.2.1 Proofs of God s Existence 93 3.2.2 The Cosmological Argument 99 3.2.3 Maimonides on Causality 104 3.2.4 The Particularization Argument 111 3.3 Comparative Analysis on the Existence of God 115 3.3.1 Proofs of God s Existence 115 3.3.2 The Cosmological Argument 118 3.3.3 Causality Argument 125 3.3.4 The Particularization Argument 131 3.4 Anthropomorphism According to al-ghazālī 138 3.4.1 Proofs of God s Incorporeality 139 3.4.2 Interpretation of Anthropomorphic Verses 140 3.5 Anthropomorphism According to Maimonides 147 3.5.1 Proofs of God s Incorporeality 147 3.5.2 Interpretation of Anthropomorphic Verses 150 3.6 Comparative Analysis on Anthropomorphism 156 3.6.1 Proofs of God s Incorporeality 156 3.6.2 Interpretation of Anthropomorphic Verses 158 3.7 Concluding Remarks 164 THE ATTRIBUTES AND NAMES OF GOD ACCORDING TO AL-GHAZĀLĪ AND MAIMONIDES 4.0 Introduction 167 4.1 Attributes of God According to al-ghazālī 167 4.1.1 The Position of Attributes to God s Essence 168 4.1.2 Essential Attributes 174 4.1.3 Names of God 183 4.2 Attributes of God According to Maimonides 189 4.2.1 The Position of Attributes to God s Essence 190 4.2.2 Essential and Negative Attributes 193 4.2.3 Names of God 203 4.3 Comparative Analysis on the Attributes and Names of God 207 4.3.1 The Position of Attributes to God s Essence 207 4.3.2 Essential Attributes 215 4.3.3 Names of God 220 4.4 Concluding Remarks 221 CHAPTER 5 THE ACTIONS OF GOD ACCORDING TO AL-GHAZĀLĪ AND MAIMONIDES 5.0 Introduction 224 5.1 Actions of God According to al-ghazālī 224 5.1.1 The Concept of Evil 225 5.1.2 Rewards and Punishments 230 5.1.3 God s Will, Power and Knowledge 238 5.2 Actions of God According to Maimonides 244 5.2.1 The Concept of Evil 245 5.2.2 Rewards and Punishments 248 5.2.3 God s Will, Power and Knowledge 257 ix
5.3 Comparative Analysis on the Actions of God 265 5.3.1 The Concept of Evil 265 5.3.2 Rewards and Punishments 269 5.3.3 God s Will, Power and Knowledge 272 5.4 Concluding Remarks 280 CHAPTER 6: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.0 Introduction 283 6.1 Existence and Anthromorphism of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides 283 6.2 Attributes and Names of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides 295 6.3 Actions of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides 302 6.4 Conclusion 309 6.5 Recommendations 316 REFERENCES 317 x
TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM Consonants Arabic letters Roman letters Arabic letters Roman letters أ,ء a, ط ṭ ب b ظ ẓ ت t ع ث th غ gh ج j ف f ح ḥ ق q خ kh ك k د d ل l ذ dh م m ر r ن n ز z و w س s ه h ش sh ي y ص ṣ ة h ض ḍ Vowels and Diphthongs a ى ī u أو aw i أ ي ay آ ā ي iy و ū و uww xi
LIST OF TABLES Table 6.1.1: Existence of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides Table 6.1.2: Anthropomorphism to al-ghazālī and Maimonides Table 6.2: Attributes and Names of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides Table 6.3: Actions of God According to al-ghazālī and Maimonides xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS The list of short forms or acronyms that are used throughout this research is as follows: P.B.U.H Ibid. Assoc Prof. Dr. Ed Trans N.d N.a N.p.p No. Peace Be Upon Him Ibidem (same reference) Associate Professor Doctor Edited Translated No date No author No place of publish Number xiii