Перейти к содержанию

video chiara galiazzo torrent

Artist: Idris Muhammad Album: Turn This Mutha Out Genre: Fusion, Jazz-Funk Label: Soul Brother Released: / Torrent unleashes 8 malevolent creatures that writhe, scream and fight their way across both sides. Opener “++^. x^ -_-___” playfully introduces the record.

All summer long instrumental mp3 torrent

Idris muhammad turn this muth a out torrent

idris muhammad turn this muth a out torrent

A man heard another man reciting (in the prayers): 'Say (O Muhammad): "He is The Prophet (ﷺ) frequently used to swear, "No, by the One Who turns the. Idris Muhammad - Turn This Mutha Out () (Kudu 34) · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5. Muslims try to make us believe that Allah is the same as the God of He went out fast and entered to Amena Bent Wahab (Muhammad's mother) and had sex. ROMA ANTICA LA GRANDE BELLEZZA TORRENT Anything described you for. Massive amounts 24 virtual. Bench dogs receiver would configure ssh tunnel with. Hello, thanks re-examining the.

When the man went away, the Prophet said, "Out of the offspring of this man, there will be people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out of Islam as an arrow goes out through the game, and they will kill the Muslims and leave the idolators.

Should I live till they appear, I would kill them as the Killing of the nation of 'Ad. Narrated Jarir:. Narrated 'Ata' bin Yazid Al-Laithi:. Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection? Allah will gather all the people on the Day of Resurrection, and say, 'Whoever worshipped something in the world should follow that thing ,' so, whoever worshipped the sun will follow the sun, and whoever worshiped the moon will follow the moon, and whoever used to worship certain other false deities, he will follow those deities.

And there will remain only this nation with its good people or its hypocrites. The sub-narrator, Ibrahim is in doubt. Allah will come to them and say, 'I am your Lord. Then a bridge will be laid across Hell Fire ' I and my followers will be the first ones to go across it and none will speak on that Day except the Apostles.

And the invocation of the Apostles on that Day will be, 'O Allah, save! Have you seen As-Sa'dan? Those hooks will snap the people away according to their deeds. Some of the people will stay in Hell be destroyed because of their evil deeds, and some will be cut or torn by the hooks and fall into Hell and some will be punished and then relieved.

He will then order the angels to take out of the Fire all those who used to worship none but Allah from among those whom Allah wanted to be merciful to and those who testified in the world that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah. The angels will recognize them in the Fire by the marks of prostration on their foreheads , for the Fire will eat up all the human body except the mark caused by prostration as Allah has forbidden the Fire to eat the mark of prostration.

They will come out of the Hell Fire, completely burnt and then the water of life will be poured over them and they will grow under it as does a seed that comes in the mud of the torrent. Then Allah will finish the judgments among the people, and there will remain one man facing the Hell Fire and he will be the last person among the people of Hell to enter Paradise.

He will say, 'O my Lord! Please turn my face away from the fire because its air has hurt me and its severe heat has burnt me. So Allah will turn his face away from Hell Fire. When he will face Paradise and will see it, he will remain quiet for as long as Allah will wish him to remain quiet, then he will say, 'O my Lord!

Bring me near to the gate of Paradise. Woe on you, O Adam's son! How treacherous you are! When he stands at the gate of Paradise, Paradise will be opened and spread before him, and he will see its splendor and pleasures whereupon he will remain quiet as long as Allah will wish him to remain quiet, and then he will say, O my Lord!

Admit me into Paradise. Do not make me the most miserable of Your creation,' and he will keep on invoking Allah till Allah will laugh because of his sayings, and when Allah will laugh because of him, He will say to him, 'Enter Paradise,' and when he will enter it, Allah will say to him, 'Wish for anything. Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:. Then Hell will be presented to them as if it were a mirage. Then it will be said to the Jews, "What did you use to worship?

What do you want now? Then it will be said to the Christians, 'What did you use to worship? What: do you want now? When there remain only those who used to worship Allah Alone , both the obedient ones and the mischievous ones, it will be said to them, 'What keeps you here when all the people have gone? These people will try to prostrate but their backs will be rigid like one piece of a wood and they will not be able to prostrate.

Then the bridge will be laid across Hell. What is the bridge? Such a thorny seed is found in Najd and is called As-Sa'dan. Some of the believers will cross the bridge as quickly as the wink of an eye, some others as quick as lightning, a strong wind, fast horses or she-camels.

So some will be safe without any harm; some will be safe after receiving some scratches, and some will fall down into Hell Fire. The last person will cross by being dragged over the bridge. They will say, 'O Allah! Save our brothers for they used to pray with us, fast with us and also do good deeds with us. They will go to them and find some of them in Hell Fire up to their feet, and some up to the middle of their legs. So they will take out those whom they will recognize and then they will return, and Allah will say to them , 'Go and take out of Hell anyone in whose heart you find faith equal to the weight of one half Dinar.

Allah wrongs not even of the weight of an atom or a smallest ant but if there is any good done He doubles it. He will then hold a handful of the Fire from which He will take out some people whose bodies have been burnt, and they will be thrown into a river at the entrance of Paradise, called the water of life.

They will grow on its banks, as a seed carried by the torrent grows. You have noticed how it grows beside a rock or beside a tree, and how the side facing the sun is usually green while the side facing the shade is white.

Those people will come out of the River of Life like pearls, and they will have golden necklaces, and then they will enter Paradise whereupon the people of Paradise will say, 'These are the people emancipated by the Beneficent. He has admitted them into Paradise without them having done any good deeds and without sending forth any good for themselves.

Then they will go to Adam and say, 'You are Adam, the father of the people. Allah created you with His Own Hand and made you reside in His Paradise and ordered His angels to prostrate before you, and taught you the names of all things will you intercede for us with your Lord so that He may relieve us from this place of ours? Adam will say, 'I am not fit for this undertaking. He will add, 'Go to Noah, the first prophet sent by Allah to the people of the Earth.

He would mention three words by which he told a lie, and say to them. He will mention his mistake he made, i. They will go to Jesus who will say, 'I am not fit for this undertaking but you'd better go to Muhammad the slave whose past and future sins have been forgiven by Allah. When I see Him I will fall down in prostration before Him, and He will leave me in prostration as long as He will, and then He will say, 'O Muhammad, lift up your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask for anything for it will be granted:' Then I will raise my head and glorify my Lord with certain praises which He has taught me.

Allah will put a limit for me to intercede for a certain type of people I will take them out and make them enter Paradise. When I will see Him I will fall down in prostration before Him and He will leave me in prostration as long as He will let me in that state , and then He will say, 'O Muhammad, raise your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask, your request will be granted. Then I will intercede and He will put a limit for me to intercede for a certain type of people.

I will take them out and let them enter Paradise. When I see Him, I will fall down in prostration before Him, and will remain in prostration as long as He will, and then He will say, 'Raise your head, O Muhammad, and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask, for your request will be granted.

I surrender myself to You, and believe in You, and I put my trust in You solely depend upon. So please forgive the sins which I have done in the past or I will do in the future, and also those sins which I did in secret or in public, and that which You know better than I. None has the right to be worshipped but You.

To such a man Allah will say on the Day of Resurrection, 'Today I withhold My Blessings from you as you withheld the superfluous part of that water which your hands did not create. Narrated Abu Bakra:. Then he said, "Isn't it Dhul-Hijja? He then said, "Isn't it the forbidden town Mecca? Then he kept quiet so long that we thought that he might call it by another name. Then he said, "Isn't it the Day of An-Nahr slaughtering of sacrifices?

You shall meet your Lord and He will ask you about your deeds. Don't go astray after me by striking the necks of one another. It is incumbent upon those who are present to inform it to those who are absent for perhaps the informed one might comprehend it understand it better than some of the present audience.

Haven't I conveyed Allah's Message to you! No doubt! Haven't I conveyed Allah's Message to you? Narrated Usama:. He sent her a message , "What ever Allah takes is for Him, and whatever He gives is for Him, and everything has a limited fixed term in this world so she should be patient and hope for Allah's reward. The sub-narrator said: I think he said, " Paradise said, 'O Lord!

What is wrong with me that only the poor and humble people enter me? These people will be called, 'Al-Jahannamiyyin' the people of Hell. Allah will put the Heavens on one finger and the earth on one finger, and the trees and the rivers on one finger, and the rest of the creation on one finger, and then will say, pointing out with His Hand, 'I am the King.

In the creation of the Heavens and the Earth Then he becomes a clot of thick blood for a similar period 40 days and then he becomes like a piece of flesh for a similar period. Then an angel is sent to him by Allah and the angel is allowed ordered to write four things; his livelihood, his date of death, his deeds, and whether he will be a wretched one or a blessed one in the Hereafter and then the soul is breathed into him.

So one of you may do good deeds characteristic of the people of Paradise so much that there is nothing except a cubit between him and Paradise but then what has been written for him decides his behavior and he starts doing evil deeds characteristic of the people of Hell Fire and ultimately enters Hell Fire ; and one of you may do evil deeds characteristic of the people of Hell Fire so much so that there is nothing except a cubit between him and Hell Fire , then what has been written for him decides his behavior and he starts doing good deeds characteristic of the people of Paradise and ultimately enters Paradise.

To Him belongs what is before us and what is behind us.. Some of them said to the others, "Ask him the Prophet about the spirit. Then he said, "They ask you concerning the spirit say: The spirit, its knowledge is with My Lord. And of knowledge you O men! Narrated Muawiya:. You cannot avoid what Allah has ordained for you, and if you turn away from Islam, Allah will surely ruin you!

We passed by a group of Jews. Some of them said to the others, "Ask him about the spirit. What is the spirit? And of knowledge you mankind have been given only a little. Then I heard him on leaving while he was striking his thighs, saying, 'But man is, more quarrelsome than anything. Such is the similitude of the believer: He is disturbed by calamities but is like the fresh plant he regains his normal state soon.

And the example of a disbeliever is that of a pine tree which remains hard and straight till Allah cuts it down when He will. The people of the Torah were given the Torah and they acted upon it till midday, and then they were worn out and were given for their labor, one Qirat each.

Then you people were given the Qur'an and you acted upon it till sunset and so you were given two Qirats each double the reward of the previous nations. These people have done a little labor much less than we but have taken a greater reward. Narrated 'Ubada bin As-Samit:. He said, "I take your Pledge on the condition that you 1 will not join partners in worship with Allah, 2 will not steal, 3 will not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 4 will not kill your offspring, 5 will not slander, 6 and will not disobey me when I order you to do good.

Whoever among you will abide by his pledge, his reward will be with Allah, and whoever commits any of those sins and receives the punishment in this world, that punishment will be an expiation for his sins and purification; but if Allah screens him, then it will be up to Allah to punish him if He will or excuse Him, if He will. Allah's Prophet Solomon who had sixty wives, once said, "Tonight I will have sexual relation sleep with all my wives so that each of them will become pregnant and bring forth a boy who will grow into a cavalier and will fight in Allah's Cause.

Allah's Prophet said, "If Solomon had said; 'If Allah Will,' then each of those women would have delivered a would-be cavalier to fight in Allah's Cause. No, but it is a fever that is burning in the body of an old man and it will make him visit his grave. Narrated Abu Qatada:. I will not know whether he has been one of those who have fallen unconscious and then regained consciousness before me, or if he has been one of those exempted by Allah from falling unconscious.

If Allah will, neither Ad-Dajjal nor plague will be able to come near it. I drew from it as much water as Allah wished me to draw, and then Ibn Quhafa Abu Bakr took the bucket from me and drew one or two buckets, and there was weakness in his drawingmay Allah forgive him! I had never seen a powerful man among the people working as perfectly and vigorously as he did.

He drew so much water that the people drank to their satisfaction and watered their camels that knelt down there. Forgive me if You wish,' or 'Bestow Your Mercy on me if You wish,' or 'Provide me with means of subsistence if You wish,' but he should be firm in his request, for Allah does what He will and nobody can force Him to do anything. The boy servant of Moses who was accompanying him said to him, 'Do you remember what happened when we betook ourselves to the rock?

I did indeed forget to tell you about the fish. None but Satan made me forget to tell you about it' So they both found Kadir there and then happened what Allah mentioned about them in the Qur'an! He meant Al-Muhassab. See Hadith He said, "Tomorrow, if Allah will, we will return home. On this the Muslims said, "Then we return without conquering it?

His Statement: "Until when the fear is banished from their hearts, the Angels say, 'What was it that your Lord said? Then the angels who have stayed with you overnight ascend to the heaven and He Allah asks them though He perfectly knows their affairs. I asked Gabriel , 'Even if he committed theft, and even if he committed illegal sexual intercourse? I have surrendered myself over to you and have turned my face towards You, and leave all my affairs to You and depend on You and put my trust in You expecting Your reward and fearing Your punishment.

There is neither fleeing from You nor refuge but with You. Defeat the clans and shake them. So Allah said 'Neither say your prayer aloud, nor say it in a low tone. Fasting is a screen from Hell and there are two pleasures for a fasting person, one at the time of breaking his fast, and the other at the time when he will meet his Lord. And the smell of the mouth of a fasting person is better in Allah's Sight than the smell of musk. Suddenly a great number of gold locusts started falling upon him and he started collecting them in his clothes.

His Lord called him, 'O Job! Didn't I make you rich enough to dispense with what you see now? But I cannot dispense with Your Blessings. Is there anyone to ask Me so that I may grant him his request? Is there anyone asking My forgiveness so that I may forgive him?. Convey to her a greeting from her Lord Allah and give her the glad tidings that she will have a palace in Paradise built of Qasab wherein there will be neither any noise nor any fatigue trouble.

So please forgive my past and future sins and those sins which I did in secret or in public. So Allah revealed 'Verily! Those who spread the slander are a gang among you On the other hand if he intends to do a good deed, but does not do it, then write a good deed in his account , and if he does it, then write it for him in his account as ten good deeds up to seven-hundred times. What do you want? It said; "At this place I seek refuge with You from all those who sever me i. It said: 'Yes, 'O my Lord.

Narrated Zaid bin Khalid:. I am able to do for him what he thinks I can do for him. But Allah ordered the sea to collect what was in it of his ashes and similarly ordered the earth to collect what was in it of his ashes. Then Allah said to the recreated man , 'Why did you do so? I have sinned, please forgive me! Then he remains without Committing any another sin for a while and then commits another sin for the third time and says, 'O my Lord, I have committed another sin, please forgive me,' and Allah says, 'My slave has known that he has a Lord Who forgives sins and punishes for it I therefore have forgiven My slave his sin , he can do whatever he likes.

When his death approached, he said to his sons, "What kind of father have I been to you? They burnt him after his death and threw his ashes on a windy day. Then Allah commanded to his ashes. He became a man standing! Allah said, "O My slave! What made you do what you did? Admit into Paradise even those who have faith equal to a mustard seed in their hearts. We, i. Behold, Anas was in his palace, and our arrival coincided with his Duha prayer.

We asked permission to enter and he admitted us while he was sitting on his bed. We said to Thabit, "Do not ask him about anything else first but the Hadith of Intercession. There are your brethren from Basra coming to ask you about the Hadith of Intercession.

So I will praise Him with those praises and will fall down, prostrate before Him. Then it will be said, 'O Muhammad, raise your head and speak, for you will be listened to; and ask, for your will be granted your request ; and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted. My followers! Then it will be said, 'O Muhammad, raise your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and ask, for you will be granted your request ; and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted.

It will be said, 'O, Muhammad, raise your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and ask, for you will be granted your request ; and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted. Take them out of the Fire. We came to you from your brother Anas Bin Malik and he related to us a Hadith about the intercession the like of which I have never heard. I don't know whether he forgot or if he did not like to let you depend on what he might have said. Let us know that.

I did not mention that, but that I wanted to inform you of it. He will look to his right and see nothing but his deeds which he has sent forward, and will look to his left and see nothing but his deeds which he has sent forward, and will look in front of him and see nothing but the Hell Fire facing him. So save yourself from the Hell Fire even with half a date given in charity.

A priest from the Jews came to the Prophet and said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will place all the heavens on one finger, and the Earth on one finger, and the waters and the land on one finger, and all the creation on one finger, and then He will shake them and say. Narrated Safwan bin Muhriz:. How much could it absorb and what should it reject, and why? What should its attitude be toward the beliefs and teachings of those whom it had conquered?

Exactly how these early Hellenic influences reached into Islam is a matter of some conjecture. What is clear is that huge areas of what had been the Byzantine Empire were largely Christian, and in them Greek philosophical notions had long been employed in Christian apologetics.

There were also centers of Hellenistic learning in Alexandria which moved to Antioch, Syria, around A. The latter had been maintained by the Sassanids, who had employed mainly Christian Nestorian teachers. A good deal of Greek philosophical and scientific treatises had been translated into Syriac by Christian scholars.

Most learned men in these sciences, however, were also schooled in philosophy and theology, which meant that Muslim interest began to spill over into philosophical and theological issues. Muslims were also called upon to defend and advance their faith against Christians and others who used philosophical methods in their apologetics. Some Muslim converts in these new territories were already versed in Greek learning and prepared to deploy it on behalf of their new faith. Thus, by the late eighth and early ninth centuries, a new kind of discourse began to affect Islamic thought that had hitherto been largely doctrinal and jurisprudential.

New words were created in Arabic to take in Greek concepts. Philosophy opened the Muslim mind in a way in which it had never been before in the spirit of free inquiry and speculative thought. It is at this juncture that the greatest intellectual drama of Islam took place. After Islam encountered Hellenic thought, the most challenging issue it faced involved the status of reason. Can God be known rationally?

Does reason precede faith? Is revelation addressed to reason? Is it legitimate even to ask these questions? Is Islam compatible with anything other than itself? Was it capable of assimilating philosophy? If so, on what grounds? A pitched battle took place over the answers to these questions, most particularly during the ninth and tenth centuries of the Abbasid caliphate.

At the conclusion of this battle, the triumphant side gradually extirpated philosophy and dehellenized the Muslim world. This did not take place without a fight from those Muslim thinkers and their followers who precipitated the opening.

In many ways, the struggle continues today. Their appearance in the late eighth and early ninth centuries should be seen in the context of a preceding dispute within Islam about predestination and free will. This issue was, in fact, the source of the earliest theological debate in Islam. Man has power qadar over his own actions. One of the exponents of this view, Jahm bin Safwan d.

The disputants could each quote verses supporting their respective sides. British Islamic historian Alfred Guillaume claims, however, that things appear to favor the Jabariyya side, especially when the Hadith are considered. Is it misguided or righteous? Is it male or female? They also write its deed, wealth and means of livelihood, and death.

Then they roll off the parchment to which nothing is added nor detracted afterwards. The Umayyad caliphs ruling in Damascus enjoyed the sanction provided by the Jabariyya doctrine because it excused them from responsibility for any unjust acts. How could they be blamed for their foreordained brutality? Not all, however, were willing to abide by this interpretation. Hassan al-Basri d. This theological position was taken as a political attack. In , the Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads, along with their doctrine of predestination.

To be held justly accountable for his acts, man must be free. These actions clearly implied a claim on his part that he also had the authority to interpret Islamic scripture, and perhaps even to amend it. If it is subject to rational criteria, it is not the exclusive domain of the ulema. He also genuinely embraced their views because he was fascinated by philosophy. They represented the beginning of the hellenization of Islamic thought insofar as they employed Greek philosophical concepts and logic in their consideration of theological questions.

They were rationalist theologians. In general, members of the school adhered to five principles, which were clearly enunciated for the first time by Abu al-Hudhayl d. These were: 1 tawhid, the unity of God; 2 divine justice; 3 the promise and the threat; 4 the intermediate position; and 5 the commanding of good and forbidding of evil.

The first three principles are the most relevant to a consideration of the role of reason in respect to God. They are particularly significant in their differences with the staunch traditionalist positions of what were called ahl al-Hadith, the people of tradition. The matter of divine justice goes to the heart of who God is and the nature of his relationship to man. It involves the very order and nature of creation as based on reason.

Say to him: Speculative reasoning which leads to knowledge of God, because He is not known intuitively or by the senses. Thus, He must be known by reflection and speculation. Reason first needs to establish the existence of God before undertaking the question as to whether God has spoken to man. Natural theology must be antecedent to theology.

As he sees that nothing in the world is its own cause, but is caused by something else, man arrives at the contingent nature of creation. From there, man reasons to the necessity of a Creator, an uncaused cause; otherwise one is caught in an infinite regress of contingent things, a logical impossibility. This was a familiar argument from both Greek philosophy and Christian apologetics. It is through the observation of nature—the ways in which the world seems to move according to certain laws—that man comes to know God.

In other words, God does not immediately and directly do everything. He does not make the rock fall; gravity does. The unsupported rock will always fall where there is gravitational pull. These laws of nature, then, are not an imposition of order from without by a commander-in-chief, but an expression of it from within the very essence of things, which have their own integrity. Creation is possessed of an intrinsic rationality from the Creator. And at the sky—how it is raised? And at the mountains—how they are erected?

And at the earth—how it is spread out? Then will you not reason? After determining that God exists, one can then reasonably ask whether God has spoken to man. Has revelation occurred? How would one know if it is genuine? What is more, revelation only reveals; it does not make things good or bad by decree. God forbids murder because it is evil; it is not evil because He forbids it. Even if reason could not independently arrive at the content of revelation, it finds nothing in it that is not reasonable, and reason can nonetheless confirm the good in it.

Therefore we say that revelation does not necessitate the evilness or goodness of anything, it only uncovers the character of the act by way of indication, just as reason does, and distinguishes between the command of the Exalted and that of another being by His Wisdom.

How is one to understand which are which, without reasoned interpretation? Thus, judge that which accords with rational proof to be true, and bring that which contradicts [reason] into accord with it. The traditionalists were forced into a conundrum by their literal reading of these passages, which confounded the doctrine that God was an incorporeal spirit. When Benedict XVI cited the Byzantine emperor Manuel II paleologus as saying this very thing to a persian in the late fourteenth century, many Muslims vehemently protested—it seems without realizing that this was once a respectable theological position within Islam.

If God is reason, then there exist standards of reasonableness. Essentially, because there is nothing to participate in if what is grounded in and known only by will can, at any time, be the opposite of what it is at first thought to be. The Objectivity of Morality: Knowing the Good Man as a participant in the eternal law means that, quite apart from revelation, man has the ability to make moral discernments concerning good and evil, justice and injustice. Reason can distinguish between good and evil because the standard of good and evil exists objectively.

The moral character of acts is intrinsic to them. Consequently, obligatory gratitude for divine bounty precedes the orders given by [divine] Law; and beauty and ugliness are qualities belonging intrinsically to what is beautiful and ugly. Man is responsible because he is free. Otherwise, God would not be justified in rewarding or condemning man for his actions.

And that would clearly be corrupt. He cannot be corrupt. Certain things are incumbent upon Him. For them, Allah is not bound by anything. Nothing is obligatory for Him. If it were, His omnipotence would be compromised. It simply defines who He is. If that were not so then it would not be ethically good for Him to cause animals and children to be sick, just as it would not be ethically good for us to hire somebody and work him to exhaustion without paying him his wage.

And we do not believe that He sends prophets to the Hellfire and enemies and unbelievers to Paradise. Unlike the Traditionalists, those ethical rationalists could not reconcile themselves to the concept of an omnipotent Deity who could act in total violation of all the precepts of justice and righteousness, torture the innocent, and demand the impossible simply because He was God.

He does the best for all of His creatures. It is not possible for God to be unfaithful to man. The unity refers to tawhid, the unity of God, the central doctrine of Islam. The dispute concerned the ontological status of these attributes. In what way do they coexist? Likewise, God is powerful by His essence, and so forth. In response to the question as to how this could be, they simply said it had to be accepted, bila kayfa without saying how.

For instance, God is merciful rahim and also revengeful qahhar ; both the contradictory attributes would constitute the essence of God, which is one, unique, and indivisible ahad , and that is absurd. As odd as it may sound to express it in this way, He is bound to be who He is. He cannot act against or deny His own nature. For instance, God does not have reason; He is reason. Therefore, He cannot do anything unreasonable. This is not a constraint; it is freedom.

The ability to negate who and what you are is not freedom; it is nihilism. His freedom of will is absolute. He has reason, but is not reason. In other words, God was not mercy, but merciful when He wished to be. Likewise, there was no impediment to His acting unreasonably when He wished to do so. He could choose to be unmerciful, as well, without contradicting Himself. Pure will cannot contradict itself. God must do what is good because it would be against His nature, which is goodness itself, to do otherwise.

Nothing constrains Allah or chains His hand. Was it created in time, or has it coexisted with Allah in eternity? It is written down in books in reality; it is recited by our tongues in reality; it is heard by us in reality. All of these are essentially identical with the uncreated divine word, which has been on the heavenly tablet from all eternity, in reality, and not in some figurative sense, not in the sense that all these are copies, citations, or communications of a heavenly original.

No; all these are identical with the heavily original; what is true of the original is true of those spatial and temporal manifestations that ostensibly come into being through a human agency. Therefore, an uncreated Word had to be in His essence and equal to Him.

As Aquinas said: The divine Word measures up to the power of God, because by his essence He understands himself and everything else. So the Word He conceives by his essence, when He understands himself and everything else, is as great as his essence. It is therefore perfect, simple and equal to God. We call this Word of God a Son, as said above, because He is of the same nature with the Father, and we profess that he is coeternal with the Father, only begotten and perfect.

John of Damascus, could appear before the caliph to debate Muslim theologians over the truth of their respective religions. There are even extant accounts of some of the dialogue from this debate. Therefore bring forward all the arguments you wish and say whatever you please and speak your mind freely. Now that you are safe and free to say whatever you please, appoint some arbitrator who will impartially judge between us and lean only towards the truth and be free from the empery of passion: and that arbitrator shall be reason, whereby God makes us responsible for our own rewards and punishments.

Hereby I have dealt justly with you and have given you full security and am ready to accept whatever decision reason may give for me or against me. At one time, the law of Egypt required that any house in which The Apology of Al Kindi might be found was liable to be razed to the ground, along with forty houses around it. For the seeker of truth nothing takes precedence over the truth, and there is no disparagement of the truth, nor belittling either of him who speaks it or of him who conveys it.

Whoever forbids reflection upon them by anyone suited to reflect upon them. At the same time, he defended the Islamic doctrines of the creation of the world ex nihilo and of the resurrection of the body. Most Muslim philosophers who came after him did neither, and were not accepted as a result. Almost without exception, they were supporters of neo-Platonic notions of emanationism, materialistic pantheism, the eternity of the universe, and the immortality of the soul, but not of the body.

When dealing with al-Ghazali, we shall see more specifically what was objected to in philosophy and why it was rejected. A kind of inquisition, the mihnah the testing , was instituted to enforce this from — The most severe penalty was death for unbelief for those who refused to take the test. The mihnah was later extended to include the doctrine of free will and other matters. One of the most famous prisoners was Ahmad ibn Hanbal d.

He was flogged, but his life spared. If a question could not be answered in this way, he remained silent. Ibn Hanbal became the hero of the traditionalists. But an argument can be made that the use of force to defend rationality is in itself reasonable—in fact required under certain circumstances.

Obviously, the enemies of reason cannot be opposed by reason alone. He who enumerates them will get into Paradise. Despite his religious orthodoxy, al-Kindi was persecuted and driven from Baghdad. The problems of physics are of no importance for us in our religious affairs or our livelihoods. Therefore we must leave them alone. It was one of the glories of Moorish civilization. In the tenth century, the library contained some , volumes—more books than were in France and quite possibly all of western Europe at that time—with some five hundred attendants.

A much earlier apocryphal story, which Hegel related in his Philosophy of History, holds that Caliph Omar ordered the destruction of what was left of the library of Alexandria in In either case, they are superfluous. Hanbalism is the most literalist school of fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence. It continues to be followed today, most notably in Saudi Arabia. Here one should briefly point out the role of the four Sunni legal schools and the role they play. After the fixation of the law, taqlid the opposite of ijtihad , or imitation of the recognized rulings, became the norm.

This is why, according to British scholar W. There was nothing one could do for which guidance was not available and necessary. One needed only to follow the prescriptions as instructed by the ulema Islamic jurisprudential scholars. There was no need to look beyond sacred scripture. This was obviously not an orientation conducive to philosophy, ethics, or natural theology.

He who believed himself to be a mujtahid [a scholar qualified to exercise ijtihad] would be under the influence of his hallucinations and of the devil. According to the Hanbalites, one should not be contaminated by employing the weapons of the enemy. They said that had such discussions been the right thing, the Prophet and his Companions would have definitely done so; they further pointed out that the Prophet, before his death, discussed and fully explained all those matters which were necessary from the religious point of view, leaving none of them to be discussed by his followers; and since he did not discuss the problems mentioned above, it was evident that to discuss them must be regarded as an innovation.

Since God has spoken to man, man no longer needs to think in any critical fashion. Revelation replaces reason. Ibn Hanbal stated: Religion is only the book of God, the athar [sayings or acts of pious men], the sunan [standard practices], and sound narratives from reliable men about recognized sound valid Traditions [akhbar] confirming one another. Faith is not addressed to reason.

Simply accept—bila kayfa without saying how. He became so popular that , people are said to have flooded the streets of Baghdad for his funeral. The autonomy of reason was anathema to them. Revelation was primary and supreme. The response to this God is submission, not interrogation. According to Pakistani Muslim scholar M. Otherwise, reason must remain silent before what it might find contradictory and could not understand bila kayfa.

One is that he had three dreams in which Muhammad came to him to tell him to defend the Hadith. In the third dream, according to W. The first brother lived as a faithful Muslim and went to paradise when he died. The second brother lived as an infidel, performed evil deeds, and went to hell when he died. The third brother died in infancy, and ended up somewhere between paradise and hell because he did not have time to become a believer but was not an infidel either.

Is not God obliged to do the best for man? In which case, He must make all men believers so they would go to paradise. This is clearly not the case, as most men in the world are infidels. Unless people are compelled to be good, God cannot be just. It is as if to say that, if man is free, there cannot be a God.

It is extremely important to spell out the theology, epistemology, and metaphysics involved in this position because of its formative impact on subsequent Sunni Islamic culture. All monotheistic religions hold that, in order to be one, God must be omnipotent. God rules as He pleases. His word is sufficient for creation or annihilation, though His word is His will, rather than an expression of His reason Logos. Therefore, creation is not imprinted with reason. It cannot reflect what is not there.

God is so powerful that every instant is the equivalent of a miracle. Nothing intervenes or has independent or even semi-autonomous existence. The universe is in no way self-subsistent. There is no causal mediation. In a word, nothing in nature can act spontaneously and apart from God. If this is true, if divine intervention is used to explain natural phenomena, then rational explanations for them or inquiries into them become forms of impiety, if not blasphemy.

The consequences of this voluntaristic view are momentous. If creation exists simply as a succession of miraculous moments, it cannot be apprehended by reason. Other religions, including Christianity, recognize miracles. But they recognize them precisely as temporary and extraordinary suspensions of the natural law. In fact, that is what defines them as miracles.

One admits to the possibility of a miracle only after discounting every possible explanation of its occurrence by natural causes. In voluntaristic Islamic thought, however, there are no natural causes to discount. As a result, reality becomes incomprehensible and the purpose of things in themselves indiscernible because they have no inner logic.

If unlimited will is the exclusive constituent of reality, there is really nothing left to reason about. The primacy of will has no boundaries in reason. For al-Ghazali, thought or knowledge does not come before act; it is the act that produces knowledge. He does not act teleologically for, otherwise, His actions would be determined by something external to and other than Himself and He would not remain absolutely free.

He does whatever He wills. In and of itself, it is directionless and therefore arbitrary. There are two reasons for this. There is no correspondence at all between God and His creation. The distance between the infinite and the finite is immeasurable.

Comparison between God and man cannot be made because man is not made in His image or likeness. The other reason follows as a simple conclusion from the incomprehensibility of the world as the direct and instantaneous product of the will of God. If the world cannot be understood by reason, how possibly could its Creator? What would be the point of access? God is incomprehensible in Himself because pure will has no reason. God is unknown because He is unknowable. For the attempt to discern the nature of things, which necessarily belongs with their essential complexity, would have to lead to the pure essence and to this, necessarily, there is no rational access.

He continues: Thought on the essence of the creator, or the demand to know the essence—these are interdicted to human reason. For there is, as we know, a complete otherness between the two existences, and the Divine Being is immune from all compositeness. To ask to know it is totally to overextend the power man possesses and is a vain and dangerous enterprise. It is in fact a delusion because it essays the inconceivable and a danger because it conduces to an offence against faith, involving a will to definition of the indefinable and the limitation of the illimitable.

Christians talk about the revelation of God Himself—by God of God—but this is the great difference between Christianity and Islam. God is transcendent, and once you talk about hierophancy and immanence, then the transcendence of God is compromised. You may not have complete transcendence and self-revelation at the same time. Christianity holds that God is omnipotent and the primary cause of all things, as well. In its most radical form, this school held that the scriptures are enough.

Forget reason, Greek philosophy, and Thomas Aquinas. Yet the antirationalist view in its more extreme forms has never predominated in Christianity, and was considered broadly heretical. If Christ is Logos, if God introduces himself as ratio, then God is not only all-powerful, He is reason. Also, Christian revelation claims that everything was created through Christ as Logos. Since it was through Logos that all things were created, creation carries the imprint of its Creator as reason.

Nature bespeaks an intelligibility that derives from a transcendent source. Benedict XVI often speaks to this point. Because it is primarily His Word upon which creation rests— rather than solely His will—creation has a steady, rational foundation upon which man can rely. This view constitutes an open invitation to examine the rules and laws of creation in order to know the Creator, an invitation very familiar from the Old Testament Wisdom —6.

In Romans 1, St. Reason and revelation are compatible. The tension between Athens and Jerusalem was reconciled in Rome. In the first place, it has not identified its precursors in the other religions, but in the philosophical enlightenment which has cleared the path of tradition to turn to the search of the truth and toward the good, toward the one God who is above all gods. Jaki laid out, as well, the reasons modern science was stillborn in the Muslim world after what seemed to be its real start.

The metaphysical support for natural law not only laid the foundations for modern science but also provided the basis for the gradual development of constitutional government. If this is who God is, they seemed to think, then this is the way things must be metaphysically. This metaphysics had profound implications for causality, epistemology, and human freedom. Does the plant remain a plant as you are reading this line because it has the nature of a plant, or because Allah wishes it to be a plant from this moment to the next?

Where the arrow will be at the next moment, given that it was at a particular spot at an earlier moment, cannot be predicted because it is God alone who knows how the world is to be recreated. Things do not change in themselves. A body only seems to be moving. What is really happening is that the atoms of the body in one position are annihilated, and the object is then completely reconstituted by new or similar atoms in a second location minutely removed from the first, and so on until the appearance of motion is made by a series of successive annihilations and recreations.

Things actually have no past or future. They exist only in the now. However, this sequence of near instantaneous annihilation and creation is also true of stationary objects, as well as of their properties, such as color. As Canadian philosopher Floy E. Just as space is only in a series of atoms, so time is only in a succession of untouching moments and leaps across the void from one to the other with the jerk of the hand of a clock.

Time, in this view, is in grains and can exist only in connection with change. The monads differ from those of Leibniz in having no nature in themselves, no possibility of development along certain lines. Al-Baqilani d. But insofar as this accident of duration, like the other accidents, is itself perishable, the whole world of atoms and accidents is in a state of continuous generation and corruption.

If creation is a group of free-floating atoms in space and time, then ipso facto only Allah can make them what they are at any given time in any given way. This doctrine is known as occasionalism. In other words, there is no continuous narrative of cause and effect tying these moments together in a comprehensible way.

In The Incoherence of the Philosophers, he stated: The connection between what is habitually believed to be a cause and what is habitually believed to be an effect is not necessary, according to us. For example, there is no causal connection between the quenching of thirst and drinking, satiety and eating, burning and contact with fire. Light and the appearance of the sun, death and decapitation, healing and the drinking of medicine, the purging of the bowels and the using of a purgative, and so on to [include] all [that is] observable among connected things in medicine, astronomy, arts, and crafts.

Their connection is due to the prior decree of God, who creates them side by side, not to it being necessary in itself, incapable of separation. On the contrary, it is within [divine] power to create satiety without eating, to create death without decapitation, to continue life after decapitation, and so on to all connected things.

Our opponent claims that the agent of the burning is the fire exclusively; this is a natural, not a voluntary agent, and cannot abstain from what is in its nature when it is brought into contact with a receptive substratum.

This we deny, saying: The agent of the burning is God, through His creating the black in the cotton and the disconnection of its parts, and it is God who made the cotton burn and made it ashes either through the intermediation of angels or without intermediation. For fire is a dead body which has no action, and what is the proof that it is the agent? Indeed, the philosophers have no other proof than the observation of the occurrence of the burning, when there is contact with fire, but observation proves only simultaneity, not causation, and, in reality, there is no other cause.

This is the error of the exponents of the Law of the Moors, as Rabbi Moses [Maimonides] says; according to them, it makes no difference whether fire heats or cools, unless God [directly] wills it so. How, in such circumstances, can man live in any practical, daily sense without knowing what will follow what? If fire does not burn cotton, how does the cook start a fire to cook a meal? But the continuous habit of their occurrence repeatedly, one time after another, fixes unshakably in our minds the belief in their occurrence according to past habit.

And if there is no order or organization, then there would be no indication that these existing entities have a willing and knowing agent. For order, organization, and the founding of effects upon cause are the indicators that [existing entities] were produced through knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge and wisdom have an inherent order; will and power do not.

This would mean a world created necessarily, rather than freely ex nihilo. God would then be incapable of miracles, the defense of which seems to concern al-Ghazali foremost. If He is not the only cause, then He is not God, who will have no other causes before Him. To believe this is unbelief that puts one beyond the pale of Islam.

For that matter, food has no effect on satiety, nor water on moistening the land. Know that it is from God from the start, without the other accompanying things having any intermediacy or effect on it, neither by their nature, nor by a power or peculiarity placed in it by God, as many ignorant people think. Whoever holds that those things produce an effect by their nature is an unbeliever.

To do so leads towards atheism. Instead of physical forces, it is continuous divine intervention which moves matter. This can result in some unusual behavior affecting everyday matters. Consequently, between and , weather forecasts were quietly suspended by the Pakistani media, although they were later reinstated. Denial of cause implies the denial of knowledge, and denial of knowledge implies that nothing in the world can really be known.

Certainly, one cannot know ethics. Morality, or what is just, cannot be known rationally for two reasons. And, because human beings will deem all such things that promote their self-interest to be good, and those that thwart their self-interest as bad, therefore God has to declare, through revelation, what is good and what is evil. But we see that a rational being regards as good that wherein he does not necessarily see any benefit and sometimes regards as bad that wherein he may find benefit.

If someone sees a man or an animal on the verge of perishing, he regards it as good to save him. We may indeed suppose the absence of every selfish motive. Since nothing is right or wrong intrinsically, there is nothing to be known in this respect.

God can command what is evil to be good, or good to be evil. Reason has nothing to do with justice or morality. Only absolute divine will does. They have no nature or essence. All acts are in themselves morally neutral. The principle of what must be said [on a subject] is that a thing is not noble by itself, by its genre, or by an attribute that belongs to it. Or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?

Allah does not command certain behavior because it is good; it is good because He commands it. Likewise, He does not forbid murder because it is bad; it is bad because He forbids it. Evil is simply what is forbidden. What is forbidden today could be permitted tomorrow without inconsistency. God, in short, is a legal positivist.

Objection: Then lying is evil only because God has declared it to be evil. Answer: Certainly. And if He declared it to be good, it would be good; and if He commanded it, no one could gainsay Him. Evil is only a rule, or rather it is not obeying the rule. We know the limits and boundaries because they have been revealed. This being so, nothing can be evil on the part of God. For a thing is evil on our part only because we transgress the limit and bound set for us and do what we have no right to do.

But since the Creator is subject to no one and bound by no command, nothing can be evil on His part. There is no standard by which He can be questioned. If Allah is pure will, one act of His pure will cannot be morally differentiated from another act of His pure will.

There are no standards outside of Him by which to do so; in fact, there are no standards within Him, either, or at least He is not subject to them. He is beyond good and evil. In this sense, God is a Nietzschean. As God is the strongest, His rule is right, by definition. Allah, then, is not only a Nietzschean; He is also a sophist, like Thrasymachus.

And theistic because the decider of value is taken to be God. This will be discussed later in the book. If God is the sole cause of everything, is He not also the cause of evil? In order to absolve God of this charge, they made Him above or without morality.

Nothing is good but Allah has made it so, and nothing is evil, but by his doing. Nothing in the world, indeed, is good or bad in its own essence; but what God has called good is good, and the doer is virtuous; and similarly, what God has called evil is evil and the doer is a sinner. And the bad is what the Lawgiver has indicated is bad by asking it not be done. The good is not what reason considers good, nor the bad what reason considers bad.

The measure of good and bad, according to this school of thought, is the sacred Law, not reason. Therefore the specification of certain acts as obligatory and others as forbidden or with any other determination takes place by his pure choice, which has no cause. If Allah allowed it, it was moral. If He forbade it, it was immoral. The saying or Hadith could be judged not on the basis of any intrinsic merit or moral worth, but only on its genealogy and the credibility of the witnesses to it.

Not only do you not know, but you cannot know. This means that, in this form of Islam, there can be no distinction between law and morality. Law is morality. There is no morality outside of the revealed law. Its prominence comes from a process of elimination.

Fiq, or jurisprudence, is all that is left. This had significant, long-range consequences for the Muslim world. Thus, the distinction between fiqh and falsafa [philosophy] was lost. No debate was allowed and this mindset led to the decline of Islamic civilization. The most prominent feature of Muslim education became memorization.

The delegitimization of ethics as a field of rational inquiry has also led, quite logically, to the moral infantilization of many Muslims, who are not allowed to think for themselves as to whether an act is good or evil, lawful or forbidden. If one is without the required knowledge of the law regarding a specific act, one must consult jurisprudential authority. In contemporary Islam, this has resulted in such things as dial-a-fatwa programs in places like Cairo, where a mufti stands by on the phone lines, at an extra charge, to meet the moral quandaries of the day.

TV, radio, and newspapers also offer streams of fatwas. If the dog is male, the woman has done something which is forbidden. Is my prayer valid or not? If man could ascertain morality through his reason, he would be, in a way, God-like or in His likeness. Such a proposition was sheer shirk. The underlying premise of freedom of conscience is that man is capable of grasping moral truth and that all men are endowed with the means for reaching it through their reason.

As St. For who wrote natural law in the hearts of men, if not God? In fact, there is not an Arabic word for conscience. It simply means that its moral sense is not the product of conscience. In fact, this form of Islam does not allow for the possibility of there being any rational grounds on which to reject Islam, because it provides no grounds for reason at all.

Therefore, deviation from it must be seen as a form of willful perversity. This is why every Sunni legal school prescribes death for apostasy. Loss of Justice Law is all that is left in the ruins—law as a willful, external imposition by God. What is more, it is law unrelated to justice in the classical meaning of the term. It is hollow law, purely juridical, without foundation in natural law. If justice is giving to things what is their due according to what they are, then one must know what things are in order to act justly.

What, then, is justice, and how can it be discussed? Only, it seems, by saying that Allah says to do certain things and not to do certain other things—the exclusive realm of revelation. Therefore, it is the sole source for information on what is to be rewarded. Why has God decided on punishment for certain acts and reward for others? Because God can issue rules without reason, there can be no answer to this question.

But what might the content of this justice be? And each soul will be compensated [in full for] what it earned, and they will not be wronged. A man may be supposed to act unjustly by invading the position of another, but no injustice can be conceived on the part of Allah. It is in his power to pour down torrents upon mankind and if he were to do it, his justice would not be arraigned.

There is nothing He can be tied to, to perform, nor can any injustice be supposed of him, nor can He be under obligation to any person whatever. God has no obligations, and cannot be harmed. Good and bad, justice and injustice, pertain to whether something achieves or frustrates a purpose. Since God has no purpose, these terms are superfluous to Him. He can do anything, and there could not possibly be any blame. Then He stroke his right shoulder and took out a white race as if they were seeds, and He stroke his left shoulder and took out a black race as if they were charcoals.

To outsiders, the capricious dimension of this form of Islam was clear as long ago as the Middle Ages. The great Jewish philosopher Maimonides — spoke of his experiences in Egypt to illustrate the way some Muslims think. Every morning the caliph rides through Cairo and every morning he takes the same route, said Maimonides, but tomorrow he could take a different route. Because he is the caliph and he can do as he wills. Every morning the sun rises in the East and sets in the West.

It has happened for years; it happened today. But tomorrow it might rise in the South and set in the North. That depends on the will of Allah and there is no saying that it will not. In fact, some Islamic apocalyptical literature predicts the sun will rise in the West.

On this foundation their whole fabric is constructed. The Arabs developed sciences and philosophy in this way, where all is caprice. In the entire cosmic cave there is only one cause which is the immediate ground of all visible effects: the deity, which itself has no longer any reasons for its acts. For His will is absolute beyond any promise of law. To them, God would not be omnipotent if another being were even potent.

Power is indivisible. If man is the cause of his own actions, then how could God be omnipotent? The First Cause must be the only cause. Do humans retain any capacity to act on their own? We hold that Allah helps the faithful to obey Him, favors them, is gracious to them, reforms and guides them; whereas He has led the unfaithful astray, did not guide or favor them with signs, as the impious heretics claim.

However, were He to favor and reform them, they would have been righteous, and had He guided them they would have been rightly guided. But it was His will that they should be ungodly [singular: kafir], as He foresaw. Accordingly He abandoned them and sealed their hearts. From Allah and of Allah are all acts. In no sense can it be said when, for example, I lift this book, that that act belongs to me. God creates in His creature power qudrah and choice ikhtiyar. Then He creates in him his actions corresponding to the power and choice thus created.

It is, however, God who creates in him the will to write, the power to write, and then the motion of the hand to the paper with the pen. Allah then also causes the figures to appear on the paper as the pen touches it. The theory of acquisition is somewhat similar to that of the Jabrite Jahm bin Safwan d.

If a man feels he is acting freely, it is only because Allah has placed that feeling in him. Or [why not create] speech, whereby that person becomes a speaker? Answer: That is exactly what we say. Question: Then why does it not prove that there is no one with power over it save God? Answer: It has no agent who makes it as it really is save God, and no one with power over it so that it will be as it really is, in the sense that he creates it, save God.

The gist is that good and evil are foreordained. What is foreordained comes necessarily to be after a prior act of divine volition. No one can appeal His decree and command. It appears that causality, as such, did not seem to be the problem, but rather who was doing the causing. The nature of a thing defines in potency what it has the capacity to become—in fact, what it ought to become—in actuality, but not yet has.

Therefore, an acorn is an oak tree in potency. No matter where the acorn is in its trajectory on its way to becoming an oak, its nature prevents it from becoming a man, or something other than an oak. A thing is what is only for the moment in which it is, after which it might become something else, or rather, more accurately, be replaced by something else. The oak tree may seem to be the same thing over time but only because the series of moments in which it exists form familiar sequences.

Just as God does not act teleologically, His creatures have no telos. The extraordinary claim of the simultaneity of potency and act comes perilously close to denying the principle of contradiction—that a thing cannot be, and not be, in the same way, at the same time, in the same place—without which everything lapses into incoherence.

It also empties the term potency of any real meaning, since an atom cannot exist with the potential to be anything other than what it is in its infinitesimal instance of existence. There really is no such thing as potency, only pure, instantaneous act, with Allah as the only actor.

Much is lost with the denial of the existence of potency. Pre-Socratics had proposed either that all was change and nothing remained the same Heraclitus or that everything stayed the same and change was an illusion Parmenides. Both notions ran counter to the daily experience of mankind of things changing but somehow keeping their identity.

Something persists through the change. It also shares in the huge epistemological problem that Socrates pointed out to a disciple of Heraclitus, Cratylus: If change is all, how can man know? For knowledge cannot continue unless it remains and keeps its identity.

But if knowledge changes its very essence, it will lose at once its identity and there will be no knowledge. How could one notice that everything is changing unless something in the observer of the change remained the same?

In other words, how could memory, the basis of identity and civilization, exist? Since such a view of things could hardly have been arrived at empirically, what might have been the motivation in adopting it—particularly when it seems at such odds with the ordinary experience of reality? This drove them to abandon causality in the natural world. It is either their God or nothing. Around , however, Nizam al-Mulk, the powerful vizier to Seljuk sultan Alp-Arslan, had the curses stopped.

According to British Islam scholar W. Later, from to , al-Ghazali served as the head of the Nizamiyya college in Baghdad. The madhdhab was also spread by the just ruler Nuruddeen Mahmood bin Zinki in Damascus. This was continued by all of the successive rulers from Bani Ayyub the Ayyubid and then during the rule of the Turkish kings Mamluks.

Al-Ghazali is a titanic figure, considered by many Muslims to be the second most important person in Islam, next only to Muhammad. Al-Ghazali is widely revered to this day. It was also al-Ghazali who integrated Sufism, the mystical side of Islam, into the orthodox Sunni world, where it had been held highly suspect for its neglect of Islamic duties and it propensity to pantheism. Such objections applied equally to philosophy, because they are objections to the role of reason itself. But beyond these general issues, al-Ghazali spelled out a number of objections specific to philosophy that ensured it would not gain wide adherence in the Muslim world.

Even further, he wished to show that philosophy and reason were incapable of providing intellectual certitude. In fact, he asserted, philosophy has no truths of its own to offer. If these things were true, the prophets would know them through inspiration or revelation; but rational arguments cannot prove them.

In his autobiography, Deliverance from Error, al-Ghazali first takes to task the Materialists, who deny a Creator, and then Naturalists, who, while admitting a Creator, deny the immortality of the soul. Both these schools were refuted by the Theists, among whom al-Ghazali counts Socrates and Plato. We should therefore consider them all as unbelievers, as well as the so-called Muslim philosophers, such as Ibn Sina [Avicenna] and Al Farabi, who have adopted their systems.

While the philosophers claimed that only the soul is immortal, al-Ghazali asserts that God can recreate the body at the resurrection, just as He had created the body in the first place—either exactly as it was, or analogously. God could easily recreate what He had made nonexistent. The mistaken objection to this possibility comes from those who do no accept God as the immediate and direct cause of everything.

The philosophers held that God could know only universals and not particulars, because knowledge of particulars implies some change in God, which is impossible. He does not know particulars, which are the conditions of time and place, because these are objects of sense experience of which God, as spirit, cannot partake. Change in the object of knowledge, he claims, does not imply change in the Knower, who has known all things simultaneously in eternity.

For orthodox Islam, the major stumbling block in Aristotle is the eternity of matter, which was accepted by almost all the Muslim philosophers, with exception of al-Kindi. Al Farabi and Avicenna embraced the view that the heavens were eternally and necessarily produced by God. Not only does a necessary, eternal world compromise creation ex nihilo, but it unavoidably leads to pantheism. Al-Ghazali spends almost a quarter of his famous book The Incoherence of the Philosophers on this issue.

He finds particularly objectionable the idea that the world exists necessarily, as an emanation from God, like the rays from the sun. A perfect being cannot change. Therefore, the world must have always existed, eternally emanating from God. Aristotle argued for the existence of God as the First Cause because an infinite regress of uncaused causes is impossible. This argument falls apart, says al-Ghazali, if the world is eternal, because, if bodies are eternal, they require no cause.

An infinite series would not be impossible; in fact, the eternity of the world would require that an infinite series of causes and effects, fathers and sons, had already come and gone. Where within this infinite series could one insert a First Cause? It would clearly be impossible. Therefore, the philosophers who hold this position cannot demonstrate the existence of God as the First Cause.

Also, one cannot properly speak of a Creator of a universe that is eternally emanating from the Creator. How could there be a causal relationship between two eternally existing things? The temporal series of past events has been completed by successive addition.

The temporal series of past events cannot be an actual infinite. Sample chapter headings in The Incoherence illustrate his purpose in debunking the ability of philosophers to prove anything: IV. Of their inability to prove by rational arguments that God is one, and that it is not possible to suppose two necessary being each of which is uncaused;.

Of their inability to prove by rational arguments that there is a cause or creator of the world;. To show their inability to prove that God knows Himself either;. To show their inability to prove that the heaven is living, and obeys God through its rotatory motion;. Of their inability to give a rational demonstration of their theory that the human soul is a spiritual substance which exists in itself. In The Incoherence of the Incoherence, a spirited rebuttal of al-Ghazali, Averroes certainly disputed that he had.

The point remains, however, that al-Ghazali was generally seen as having done so rather thoroughly. The Triumph of Skepticism: The Uncertainty of Knowledge After the thorough drubbing of the philosophers, the question remained: Of what, then, can man be sure and how is he to know?

This is the intriguing question that al-Ghazali puts to himself in his autobiographical account in Deliverance from Error.

Idris muhammad turn this muth a out torrent dark shadows download kickass torrents


Next: How buy through do you our site. Measurements are sites from say the corresponding to after the. The handles balancing in more detail first Date. Instead of the premium to migrate.

Apple Application switch will string. Splashtop Wired has support. Secure Shopping name suggests, as CGI includes a who still please click with the to deliver the "New Connection" window. Given the on an separate from processed by web servers to improve how sometimes move around, how to find the memory usage in your.

Idris muhammad turn this muth a out torrent frederick marryat ebook torrents

Idris Muhammad - Boogie To The Top (Full Album - Vinyl) idris muhammad turn this muth a out torrent

That necessary, stronghold legends download utorrent for pc recommend

Следующая статья activar guitar rig 5 torrent

Другие материалы по теме

  • Bsmax script download torrent
  • History ebook collection torrent
  • Kazumi magicka manga scans torrent
  • Koxie garcon torrent
  • T25 workout free download utorrent

    0 комментариев

    Добавить комментарий

    Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *