Chapter IV: Part 4

We know that he left Bagdad, returned to Tus, his native place, and settled down to study and contemplation. Strange to say, at this time of his life he seems to have found the greatest delight in going back again to the study of Tradition, especially the collections of Al-Bokhari and of Muslim. All his biographers seem to agree in this. He had charge of a _madrasa_ and of the _khanka_ or monastery for Sufis. Every moment was filled with study and devotion until in the fifty-fifth year of his life (lunar calendar) the end came.

The austerity and privations of his long wanderings doubtless wore down his strength. One who had risen to so high a position of authority on religious matters also had to pay the price of leadership in controversy with opponents, and of their envy, and their slander, as we are told by al-Ghafir. This may have been, Macdonald thinks, one of the causes for his removal from Nishapur to Tus. A friend remarks in regard to his attitude towards those who opposed his teaching and envied his influence: “However much he met of contradiction and attack and slander, it made no impression on him, and he did not trouble himself to answer his assailants. I visited him many times, and it was no bare conjecture of mine that he, in spite of what I saw in him in time past of maliciousness and roughness towards people, and how he looked upon them contemptuously through his being led astray by what God had granted him of ease in word and thought and expression, and through the seeking of rank and position, had come to be the very opposite and was purified from these stains. And I used to think that he was wrapping himself in the garment of pretense, but I realized after investigation that the thing was the opposite of what I had thought, and that the man had recovered after being mad.”

Al-Ghazali died on Monday, the fourteenth of Jumada II, A. H. 505 (Dec. 18th, 1111). His brother Ahmad (quoted by Murtadha from Ibn Jawzi’s _Kitab ath-thabat ʾind al-mamat_) gives the following account of his death: “On Monday, at dawn, my brother performed the ablution and prayed. Then he said, ‘Bring me my grave-clothes,’ and he took them and kissed them and laid them on his eyes and said, ‘I hear and obey to go in to the King.’ And he stretched out his feet towards Mecca, and was taken to the good will of God Most High. He was buried at, or outside of, Tabran, the citadel of Tus, and Ibn As-Samaʾni visited his grave there.”

Later biographers were not satisfied with the bare facts of his decease. Murtadha gives a far more interesting story. “When death drew near to the Imam Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali, he commanded his servant, an excellent and religious man, to dig his grave in the middle of his house, and to summon the people of the neighbouring villages to attend his funeral; that they should not touch him, but that a company of three men unknown in the region of Al-ʾIraq would come out of the desert, that two of them would wash him, and the third would undertake the prayer over him without the advice or command of any one. Then, when he died, the servant did according to all that he had commanded, and required the presence of the people. And when the people gathered to attend the funeral, they saw three men who had come out of the desert. Two of them began to wash the corpse, while the third vanished and did not appear. But when they had washed him and arranged him in the grave-clothes, and carried his bier and laid it on the edge of the grave, the third appeared wrapped in his robe with a black border on both sides, turbaned with wool, and he prayed for him and the people prayed with him. Then he gave the benediction and departed and hid from the people. And some of the excellent of the people of Al-ʾIraq who were present at the funeral had noticed him carefully, but did not know him until some of them heard a _Hatif_ in the night saying to them, ‘The man who led the people in prayer is Abu ʾAbd Allah Mohammed b. Ishaq Amghar, the Sharif. He came from the farthest Maghrib, from ʾAyn al-Qatr, and those who washed the corpse are his comrades Abu Shuʾayb Ayyub b. Saʾid and Abu ʾIsa Wajih.’ And when they heard that they journeyed from Al-ʾIraq to Sanhaja of the farthest Maghrib, and when they had reached them and asked of them their prayers, they returned to Al-ʾIraq and related it to the Sufis and published their miracle (_karama_). Then a company of them, when they heard that, went to visit them and found them to be those whom they noticed carefully, and they asked of them their prayers. And this is a strange story.”[52]

An equally remarkable story is told of the death of Al-Ghazali’s younger brother in the books of the Persian mystics.[53] The verses given might well apply to Al-Ghazali himself and his views of life and death. “Moghith related, on the authority of Kadiri tradition, how the famous Ahmed-Al-Ghazali, native of Tus in Persia, said one day to his disciples, ‘Go and bring me new and white garments.’ They went; and on returning with the objects required, found their master dead; by his side was a paper on which were written the following stanzas:

“‘Tell my friends, who behold me dead,
Weeping and mourning my loss a while,
Think not this corpse before you myself:
That corpse is mine, but it is not I.
I am an undying life, and this is not my body,
Many years my house and my garment of change;
I am the bird, and this body was my cage,
I have wing’d my flight elsewhere, and left it for a token.
I am the pearl, and this my shell,
Broken open and abandon’d to worthlessness;
I am the treasure, and this was a spell
Thrown over me, till the treasure was released in truth.
Thanks be to God, who has delivered me,
And has assign’d me a lasting abode in the highest.
There am I now the day conversing with the happy,
And beholding face to face unveiled Deity;
Contemplating the Mirror wherein I see and read
Past and present, and whatever remains to be.
Food and drink too are mine, yet both are one;
Mystery known to him who is worthy to know.
It is not “wine sweet of taste” that I drink;
No, nor “water,” but the pure milk of a mother.
Understand my meaning aright, for the secret
Is signified by words of symbol and figure,—
I have journey’d on, and left you behind;
How could I make an abode of your halting-stage?
Ruin then my house and break my cage in pieces,
And let the shell go perish with kindred illusions;
Tear my garment, the veil once thrown over me;
Then bury all these, and leave them alike for I go.
Deem not death death, for it is in truth
Life of lives, the goal of all our longings.
Think lovingly of a God whose Name is love,
Who joys in rewarding, and come on secure of fear.
Whence I am, I behold you undying spirits like myself,
And see that our lot is one, and you as I.’”

We are indebted to the Rev. Dwight M. Donaldson of Mashad, Persia, for the interesting photographs of the ruins of Tus and of the supposed tomb of Al-Ghazali. The mosque is very old and probably dates from the time of Al-Ghazali. The grave shown in the picture, however, _may_ not be the grave of Al-Ghazali the mystic but of another celebrated Ghazali. For we read in As-Subqi (Vol. III, p. 36) that there was one called Ahmed ibn Mohammed Abu Hamed Al-Ghazali, the older and earlier one. He says that people have thrown doubt upon his very existence, but that after careful inquiry he has found mention of this man in several books, including the _Kitab Al Ansab_ of Ibn As-Samʾani. He mentions the fact that this man also lived in Khorasan, was celebrated for his learning, wrote books on theological questions, and was buried at Tus, where his grave was well known; and because of this people called him the Old Ghazali, and used to come to his grave in order to obtain answers to their prayers. He thinks that this Ghazali was either the uncle or the grand-uncle of Al-Ghazali, whose biography we have written. Incidentally we may conclude from this statement of As-Subqi that the name of Al-Ghazali was not given to him because his _father_ was a spinner of wool! It must have been an old family name.

Mr. Donaldson gives this interesting information: “The walls of the old city of Tus still stand. It is one _farsakh_ around them, three and a third miles. There are many fragments of towers and in nine places there are remains of gates. The wall was originally five yards wide. In the largest cemetery the tombstone of Ahmad Ghazali may still be seen. This cemetery lies southwest from the city and while the bulk of it is now under cultivation, the more distant part that lies on the higher ground beyond the waterway has been kept a cemetery.

“The picture I have enclosed of Ghazali’s tomb is not as satisfactory as I would have liked. It shows that a large chip has been taken from one corner of the grave. The stone is about two yards long, one-third yard wide, and one-third yard high. There are positive indications of an effort having been made to cut off the portion on which the name of Ahmed Al-Ghazali appears. It is the part that is chipped in the picture. About at the point where the chipping appears to begin there is a straight line cut about one inch deep across the top of the stone.

“On the road that runs through the city from the southwest gate the old mosque is imposing even in its ruined condition. It stands eighteen yards high and the inner measurements show it to consist of a square base, five yards high, then an octagonal structure eight yards high. (See illustration.)

“Outside the southwest gate an ancient bridge is still in use, as caravans from Mashad come through the old city of Tus. This bridge has eight arches, each four and one-half yards wide. The name of the stream is the _Kashf Rud_.

“The fortress itself is interesting; it is surrounded by a moat and a wall, within which lies a large courtyard and the high approach to the fort itself. At present we could walk around the wall and approach the fort by a passage in the rear. In the courtyard they are now raising the best water-melons we have eaten in Persia. Four gigantic corner fragments of the fort are now standing. In the midst of the débris of bricks within these old walls we found interesting fragments of pottery.”

In another letter from Mashad, Persia, dated January 17, 1917, the Rev. Dwight M. Donaldson writes: “This week I made another trip to Tus, carefully examining again the tombstone of Ghazali. As I wrote you before, the stone has been badly worn and in addition to that has been mutilated. However, on the point of doubt as to whether the stone photographed was really the one marking Mohammed Al-Ghazali’s tomb, or the tomb of another Ahmad Al-Ghazali, I can now say that I believe it is the tomb of Abu Hamed ibn Mohammed ibn Mohammed ibn Mohammed Al-Ghazali, for the reason that we can clearly read on the corner of the top of the stone, the end which some one in times past attempted to cut off, the name غزّالي and بوحا. And as one studies the stone he is almost willing to declare that the name is fully intelligible with the exception of the initial _aleph_. The whole top is badly worn indeed, but the word that my _mirza_ first read as Ahmad is clearly not Ahmad, but what it is we cannot tell. The damage is too complete.

“You will notice that Ghazzali appears in the stone to have been spelled with a _tashdeed_ and yet the mark we have considered a tashdeed is not the usual form (v instead of w).”

This investigation, therefore, would seem to settle two points: that we have at Tus the neglected and mutilated grave of the great mystic and theologian, Al-Ghazali; and that on this grave the middle letter of the name is double. In view of the common usage, however, and in deference to the authorities of Moslems themselves, we have uniformly written Ghazali.

V

His Creed and Credulity

“This man, (Al-Ghazali) if ever any have deserved the name,
was truly a ‘divine,’ and he may be justly placed on a level
with Origen, so remarkable was he for learning and ingenuity,
and gifted with such a rare faculty for the skilful and
worthy exposition of doctrine. All that is good, noble, and
sublime that his great soul had compassed he bestowed upon
Mohammedanism, and he adorned the doctrines of the Koran with
so much piety and learning that, in the form given them by him,
they seem, in my opinion, worthy the assent of Christians.
Whatsoever was most excellent in the philosophy of Aristotle or
in the Sufic mysticism he discreetly adapted to the Mohammedan
theology; from every school he sought the means of shedding
light and honour upon religion; while his sincere piety and
lofty conscientiousness imparted to all his writings a sacred
majesty. He was the first of Mohammedan divines.”

—_Dr. August Tholuck._

V

HIS CREED AND CREDULITY

Although, according to his own testimony in his “Confessions,” Al-Ghazali was troubled from his earliest years with doubt and scepticism, he was not willing to yield to it, and his faith rose triumphant above all his doubts. This is one of the outstanding facts in his biography. He could say with the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews that “faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.” Not only did he find God in nature and in his own conscience and consciousness, but he was a firm believer in revelation. Naturally the only revelation to which Al-Ghazali turned as the basis, the very bed-rock of religious faith, was the Koran, the eternal, uncreated word of God according to Moslem teaching; and also to the life of the Prophet Mohammed, his practices and his precepts handed down in orthodox Tradition—this also was a revelation from God.

Whether he ever read the Old and New Testament is a question we consider unanswered. He did not draw his creed from this source.

Al-Ghazali gives the distinction very clearly, almost as clearly as the Epistle of James, between faith and works. He was a dogmatic theologian and laid down, as we shall see in this chapter, with punctilious care every point of dogma; but he was also a moralist and a man of high ideals which he sought to attain through prayer and fasting and pilgrimage, and a life of utter devotion to the will of God. His faith was living and practical, not theoretical and scholastic. In his great work, the _Ihya_, he discusses the whole subject of faith, and enumerates the following classes of believers:

“He who combines inner belief with outward confession and good works is a true believer and enters Paradise.

“He who combines inner belief with outward confession and some good works but commits one or more great sins, does not thereby cease to be a believer, though his faith is not of the highest degree. The Muʾtazila deny that such a one can be considered a believer, but that nevertheless by committing deadly sins he does not become an unbeliever but is in an intermediate state between a believer and an infidel. An infidel is an impious person and goes into everlasting hell-fire.”

The opinions with regard to the person who combines inner belief with outward confession, but has no good works are divided. Abu Talibu’l Makki says: “Good works are part of the faith, and faith cannot exist without them.” The Sunni doctors of Islam, however, reject this opinion as absolutely false, for they say that it is a truth accepted by general agreement, that a man who believes and confesses and dies before he has done any good work, is a true believer and enters Paradise; that good works cannot consequently be considered as a necessary part of faith, and that faith can exist without them.

“He who believes in his heart, but dies before he has either confessed or performed good works, is nevertheless a true believer and enters into Paradise. Those who consider confession a necessary part of faith naturally consider that such a one has died without faith, an opinion absolutely contrary to the Sunni dogma.

“He who believes in his heart, and has time and opportunity of confessing, and knows that it is the duty of the Moslem to do so, and does not confess his faith, is nevertheless a believer in the sight of God, and will not be cast into everlasting hell-fire, for faith is the mere belief, intellectual conviction and assent, and this belief does not cease to exist through the want of outward confession. Such a man is a believer in the sight of God, but an unbeliever in this world before the court of justice and with regard to the rights of Moslems. In case of an impediment of the tongue, a sign with the hand is as good as confession with the tongue. The sect of the Murjiʾa go too far by saying that a believer, even if he act wickedly, will never enter hell-fire. _The orthodox doctrine on this subject is that every one, even the most perfect believer, will enter hell-fire, for no one is free from committing some sins, for which he must enter fire; only infidels, however, will remain in it forever._”

“He who confesses with the tongue saying: ‘There is no God but God, and Mohammed is His apostle,’ but does not believe it in his heart is an infidel in the sight of God, and will be cast into eternal hell-fire. In this world, however, he is to be considered and treated as a believer and a Moslem, for man cannot penetrate into the secrets of the heart, and the confession of the mouth must be taken to be the interpreter of the thoughts of the heart. In order, however, to make a man a Moslem in this world, before the law, in the sight of the Qadi, confession is necessary.”

Not only does he classify believers in this careful way, but he also discusses the question, in the first book of his _Ihya_, whether Islam is the same thing as _iman_ (faith) or not, and if these two are not the same thing, can they exist separately or must they necessarily be combined? “Some say that Islam and _Iman_ are synonymous terms and that consequently every believer is a Moslem and every Moslem a believer.” This is the opinion held by the orthodox school. Others say that they are distinct things but joined together. Al-Ghazali answers this difficult question in this way: _Iman_ (Faith), from the linguistic point of view, means belief, intellectual conviction and assent; Islam means submission, subjection, obedience. The seat of _Iman_ is the heart or mind, and the tongue is its interpreter. Islam comprises belief with the heart and confession with the tongue, and good works by the members of the body, and is consequently a more comprehensive term than _Iman_. _Iman_ is one of the component parts of Islam, and Islam, therefore, includes it; but _Iman_, being a more restricted term, does not include Islam. From a linguistic point of view the two terms are therefore not synonymous. From the point of view of the law and religion, and in a theological sense the two terms are sometimes used as being synonymous, and sometimes as having different meanings and as being intermingled, comprised in each other. _Iman_ and Islam are found in the individual who believes in his heart and outwardly observes the precepts of Islam; Islam exists separately in the individual, who only believes in his heart; but neither confesses, nor does good works, and Islam exists separately in him who outwardly observes the precepts of Islam, without inner belief.

What the faith of Islam meant to Al-Ghazali we know from all his works, especially from the _Ihya_, which besides other topics gives a full exposition of Moslem belief in regard to the six articles of their creed and the five pillars of practice. The reader may judge for himself both the contents and omissions of Al-Ghazali’s _credo_ from the following brief exposition which he wrote for his pupils:

HIS CREED[54]

“We say—and in God is our trust—Praise belongeth unto God,
the Beginner, the Bringer-back, the Doer of what He willeth,
the Lord of the Glorious Throne and of Mighty Grasp, the
Guider of His chosen creatures to the right path and to the
true way, the Granter of benefits to them after the witness
to the Unity (_tawhid_) by guarding their articles of belief
from obscurities of doubt and opposition. He that bringeth
them to follow His Apostle, the Chosen one (_Al-Mustafa_) and
to imitate the traces of His Companions, the most honoured,
through His aid and right guidance revealed to them in His
essence and His works by His beautiful qualities which none
perceives, save he who inclines his ear. He is the witness who
maketh known to them that He in His essence is One without any
partner (_sharik_). Single without any similar, Eternal without
any opposite, Separate without any like. He is One, Prior
(_qadim_) with nothing before Him, from eternity (_azali_)
without any beginning, abiding in existence with none after
Him, to eternity (_abadi_) without any end, substituting
without ending, abiding without termination. He hath not ceased
and He will not cease to be described with glorious epithets;
finishing and ending, though the cutting off of the ages and
the terminating of allotted times have no rule over Him, but He
is the First and Last, the External and the Internal, and He
knoweth everything.

“We witness that He is not a body possessing form, nor a
substance possessing bounds and limits; He does not resemble
bodies, either in limitation or in accepting division. He is
not a substance and substances do not exist in Him; and He is
not an accident and accidents do not exist in Him, nay He does
not resemble an entity, and no entity resembles Him; nothing
is like Him and He is not like anything; measure does not
bound Him and boundaries do not contain Him; the directions do
not surround Him and neither the earth nor the Heavens are on
different sides of Him. Lo, He is seated firmly upon His throne
(_ʿarsh_), after the manner which He has said, and in the sense
in which He willed a being-seated firmly (_istawa_), which
is far removed from contact and fixity of location and being
established and being enveloped and being removed. The Throne
does not carry Him, but the Throne and those that carry it are
carried by the grace of His power and mastered by His grasp.
He is above the Throne and the Heavens and above everything
unto the limit of the Pleiades, with an aboveness which does
not bring Him nearer to the Throne and the Heavens, just as
it does not make Him further from the earth and the Pleiades.
Nay, He is exalted by degrees from the Throne and the Heavens,
just as He is exalted by degrees from the earth and the
Pleiades; and He, in spite of that, is near to every entity and
is ‘nearer to a creature than the artery of his neck’ (Koran
50, 15), and He witnesseth everything, since His nearness
does not resemble the nearness of bodies, just as His essence
does not resemble the essence of bodies. He does not exist in
anything, just as nothing exists in Him; He has exalted Himself
far therefrom that a place should contain Him, just as He has
sanctified Himself far therefrom that time should limit Him.
Nay, He was before He had created Time and Place and He is now
above that which He was above, and distinct from His creatures
through His qualities. There is not in His essence His equal,
nor in His equal His essence. He is far removed from change of
state or of place. Events have no place in Him, and mishaps do
not befall Him. Nay, He does not cease, through His glorious
epithets, to be far removed from changing, and through His
perfect qualities to be independent of perfecting increase.
The existence of His essence is known by reason; His essence
is seen with the eyes, a benefit from Him and a grace to the
pious, in the Abiding Abode and a completion in beatitude from
Him, through gazing upon His gracious face.

“We witness that He is living, powerful, commanding,
conquering; inadequacy and weakness befall Him not; slumber
seizes Him not, nor sleep. Passing away does not happen to
Him, nor death. He is Lord of the Worlds, the Visible and the
Invisible, that of Force and that of Might; He possesses Rule
and Conquest and Creation and Command; the heavens are rolled
in His right hand and the created things are overcome in His
grasp; He is separate in creating and inventing; He is one in
bringing into existence and innovating; He created the creation
and their works and decreed their sustenance and their terms of
life; not a decreed thing escapes His grasp and the mutations
of things are not distant from His power; the things which He
hath decreed cannot be reckoned and the things which He knoweth
have no end.

“We witness that He knoweth all the things that can be known,
comprehending that which happeneth from the bounds of the earth
unto the topmost heavens; no grain in the earth or the heavens
is distant from His knowledge. Yea, He knows the creeping of
the black ant upon the rugged rock in a dark night, and He
perceives the movement of the mote in the midst of the air; He
knows the secret and the concealed and has knowledge of the
suggestions of the minds and the movements of the thoughts and
the concealed things of the inmost parts, by a knowledge which
is prior from eternity; He has not ceased to be describable by
it, from the ages of the ages, not by a knowledge which renews
itself and arises in His essence by arrival and removal.

“We witness that He is a Willer of the things that are, a
Director of the things that happen; there does not come
about in the world seen or unseen, little or much, small or
great, good or evil, advantage or disadvantage, faith or
unbelief, knowledge or ignorance, success or loss, increase or
diminution, obedience or rebellion, except by His will. What
He wills is, and what He wills not is not. Not a glance of one
who looks, or a slip of one who thinks is outside of His will;
He is the creator, the Bringer back, the Doer of that which
He wills. There is no opponent of His command and no repeater
of His destiny and no refuge for a creature from disobeying
Him, except by His help and His mercy, and no strength to a
creature to obey Him except by His will. Even though mankind
and the _Jinn_ and the Angels and the _Shaytans_ were to unite
to remove a single grain in the world or to bring it to rest
without His will, they would be too weak for that. His will
subsists in His essence as one of His qualities; He hath not
ceased to be described through it as a Willer, in His infinity
of the existence of things at their appointed times which He
hath decreed. So they come into existence at their appointed
times even as He has willed in His infinity without precedence
or sequence. They happen according to the agreement of His
knowledge and His will, without exchange or change in planning
of things, nor with arranging of thoughts or awaiting of time,
and therefore one thing does not distract Him from another.

“And we witness that He is a Hearer and a Seer. He hears and
sees and no audible thing is distant from His hearing, and no
visible thing is far from His seeing, however fine it may be.
Distance does not curtain off His hearing and darkness does not
dull His seeing; He sees without eyeball or eyelid, and hears
without earholes or ears, just as He knows without a brain and
seizes without a limb and creates without an instrument, since
His qualities do not resemble that quality of created things,
just as His essence does not resemble the essences of created
things.

“And we witness that He speaks, commanding, forbidding,
praising, threatening, with a speech from all eternity, prior,
subsisting in His essence, not resembling the speech of created
things. It is not a sound which originates through the slipping
out of air, or striking of bodies; nor is it a letter which is
separated off by closing down a lip or moving a tongue. And the
Koran and the _Tawrat_ (the Law of Moses) and the _Injil_ (the
Gospel) and the _Zabbur_ (the Psalms) are His books revealed to
His Apostles. And the Koran is repeated by tongues, written in
copies, preserved in hearts; yet it in spite of that, is prior
subsisting in the essence of God, not subject to division and
separation through being transferred to hearts and leaves.
And Musa heard the speech of God without a sound and without a
letter, just as the pious see the essence of God, in the other
world without a substance or an attribute.

“And since He has those qualities, He is living, Knowing,
Powerful, a Willer, a Hearer, a Seer, a Speaker, through Life,
Power, Knowledge, Will, Hearing, Seeing, Speech, not by a thing
separated from His essence.

“We witness that there is no entity besides Him, except what is
originated from His action and proceeds from His justice, after
the most beautiful and perfect and complete and just of ways.
He is wise in His actions, just in His determinations; there is
no analogy between His justice and the justice of creatures,
since tyranny is conceivable in the case of a creature, when he
deals with the property of some other than himself, but tyranny
is not conceivable in the case of God. For He never encounters
any property of some other than Himself so that His dealing
with it might be tyranny. Everything besides Him, consisting
of men and _Jinn_ and Angels and _Shaytans_ and the heavens
and the earth and animals and plants and inanimate things
and substance and attribute and things perceived and things
felt, is an originated thing, which He created by His power
before any other had created it, after it had not existed,
and which He invented after that it had not been a thing,
since He in eternity was an entity by Himself, and there was
not along with Him any other than He. So He originated the
creation thereafter, by way of manifestation of His power, and
verification of that which had preceded of His Will, and of
that which existed in eternity of His Word; not because He has
any lack of it or need of it. And He is gracious in creating
and in making for the first time and in imposing of duty—not
of necessity—and He is generous in befitting; and well-doing
and gracious helping belong to Him, since He is able to bring
upon His creatures different kinds of punishment and to test
them with different varieties of pains and ailments. And if
He did that it would be justice on His part, and would not be
a vile action or tyranny in Him. He rewardeth His believing
creatures for their acts of obedience by a decision which is of
generosity and of promise and not of right and of obligation,
since no particular action towards any one is incumbent upon
Him, and tyranny is inconceivable in Him, and no one possesses
a right against Him. And His right to acts of obedience is
binding upon the creatures because He has made it binding
through the tongues of His prophets, not by reason alone. But
He sent apostles and manifested their truth by plain miracles,
and they brought His commands and forbiddings and promisings
and threatenings. So, belief in them as to what they have
brought is incumbent upon the creation.

“The second Word of Witnessing is witnessing that the
apostolate belongs to the apostle, and that God sent the
unlettered Qurayshite prophet, Mohammed, with his apostolate
to the totality of Arabs and foreigners and Jinn and men.
And He abrogated by his law the other Laws except so much of
them as He confirmed; and made him excellent over the rest of
the prophets and made him the Lord of Mankind and declared
incomplete the Faith that consists in witnessing the Unity,
which is saying, ‘There is no god except God,’ so long as there
is not joined that of witnessing to the Apostle, which is
saying ‘Mohammed is the Apostle of God.’ And He made obligatory
upon the creation belief in Him, as to all which He narrated
concerning the things of this world and the next. And then He
would not accept the faith of a creature, so long as he did not
believe in that which the Prophet narrated concerning things
after death. The first of these is the question of Munkar and
Nakir; these are two awful and terrible beings who will cause
the creature to sit up in his grave, complete, both soul and
body; and they will ask him, ‘Who is thy Lord, and what is thy
religion (_din_), and who is thy Prophet?’ They are the two
testers in the grave and their questioning is the first testing
after death. And that he should believe in the punishment of
the grave—that it is a Verity and that its judgment upon the
body and the soul is just, according to what God wills. And
that he should believe in the Balance—it with the two scales
and the tongue, the magnitude of which is like unto the stages
of the heavens and the earth. In it, deeds are weighed by the
power of God Most High; and its weights in that day will be
the weight of motes and mustard seeds, to show the exactitude
of its justice. The leaves of the good deeds will be placed in
a beautiful form in the scale of light; and then the Balance
will be weighed down by them according to the measure of their
degree with God, by the grace of God. And the leaves of evil
deeds will be cast in a vile form into the scale of darkness,
and the Balance will be light with them, through the justice of
God. And that he should believe that the Bridge (_as-Sirat_)
is a Verity; it is a bridge stretched over the back of Hell
(_Jahannam_), sharper than a sword and finer than a hair. The
feet of the unbelievers slip upon it, by the decree of God,
and fall with them into the Fire. But the feet of believers
stand firm upon it, by the grace of God, and so they pass into
the Abiding Abode. And that he should believe in the Tank
(_Hawdh_), to which the people shall go down, the Tank of
Mohammed from which the believers shall drink before entering
the Garden and after passing the Bridge. Whoever drinks of it a
single draught will never thirst again thereafter. Its breadth
is a journey of a month; its water is whiter than milk and
sweeter than honey; around it are ewers in numbers like the
stars of heaven; into it flow two canals from _Al-Kawthar_
(Koran 108). And that he should believe in the Reckoning
and in the distinctions between men in it, him with whom it
will go hard in the Reckoning and him to whom compassion
will be shown therein, and him who enters the Garden without
reckoning,—these are the honoured (_muqarrab_). God Most
High will ask whomsoever He will of the prophets, concerning
the carrying of His message, and whomsoever He will of the
unbelievers, concerning the rejection of the messengers; and
He will ask the innovators (_Mubtadiʾs_) concerning the Sunna;
and the Moslems concerning works. And that he should believe
that the attestors of God’s Unity (_muwahhids_) will be brought
forth from the Fire, after vengeance has been taken on them, so
that there will not remain in Hell an attestor of God’s Unity.
And that he should believe in the intercession (_shafaʾa_)
of the prophets, next of the learned (_ʿulama_), next of the
martyrs, next of the rest of the believers—each according to
his dignity and rank with God Most High. And he who remains of
the believers, and has no intercessor, shall be brought forth
of the grace of God, whose are Might and Majesty. So there
shall not abide eternally in the Fire a single believer, but
whoever has in his heart the weight of a single grain of faith
shall be brought forth therefrom. And that he should confess
the excellence of the Companions—May God be well pleased with
them—and their rank; and that the most excellent of mankind,
after the Prophet is Abu Bakr, next Umar, next Uthman, next
Ali—May God be well pleased with them; And that he should think
well of all the Companions and should praise them like as he
praises God, whose are Might and Majesty, and His Apostles. All
this is that which has been handed down in tradition from the
Prophet and in narratives from the followers. He who confesses
all this, relying upon it, is of the People of the Truth and
the Company of the Sunna, and hath separated himself from the
band of error and the sect of innovation (_bidʾa_). So we ask
from God perfection of certainty and firm standing in the Faith
(_din_) for us and for all Moslems through His compassion.—Lo!
He is the Most Compassionate!—and may the blessing of God be
upon our Lord Mohammed and upon every chosen creature.”

The above is Doctor Macdonald’s careful translation of what Al-Ghazali taught was involved when Moslems say: _There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is Allah’s Apostle._ Surely he gave this shortest of all creeds its full significance and value.

It is necessary, however, not only to see in it the faith of Al-Ghazali but his credulity as well, if we desire to understand the man and his times. Once his early scepticism was overcome, he was always and everywhere an orthodox Moslem, and therefore swallowed the Traditions and the Koran apparently without any philosophic doubt. He believed that Mohammed was the greatest of all the prophets, and that, so he says, “God has established Mohammed’s prophetic character by miracles, such as the splitting of the moon, and the praising of him by stones, the gushing out of water from between his fingers. One of the greatest miracles, proving his divine mission, is the Koran, for none of the Arabs were able to produce anything like it. Another sign of his prophetic character is his being able to foretell things which are to come to pass, such as his victorious entry into Mecca, the defeat of the Greeks and their subsequent victories.” (See the special chapter in the _Ihya_ on this subject.)

He was a predestinarian in the fullest sense. In one place he writes: “When God Almighty let His hands pass over the back of Adam and gathered men into His two hands, He placed some of them in His right hand and the others in His left; then He opened both His hands before Adam, and Adam looked at them and saw them like imperceptible atoms. Then God said: ‘These are destined for Paradise and these are destined for hell-fire.’ He then asked them: ‘Am I not your Lord?’ And they replied: ‘Certainly, we testify that Thou art our Lord.’ God then asked Adam and the angels to be witnesses to the act; after this God replaced them into the loins of Adam. They were at that time purely spiritual beings without bodies. He then caused them to die, but gathered them and kept them in a receptacle near His throne. When the germ of a new being is placed in the womb of the mother, it remains there till its body is sufficiently developed; the soul in the same is then dead yet. When God Almighty breathes into the spirit, He restores to it its most precious part of which it had been deprived while preserved in the receptacle near the throne. This is the first death and the second life. Then God places man in this world till he has reached the term fixed for him.”

The great Mystic was also superstitious. Some of his books deal with magical formulæ taken from the Koran and the medicinal use of its text or of the names of God. One of the most celebrated magic squares used on amulets, etc., is called the “Square of Al-Ghazali” or _Al-Buduh_. It may interest in conclusion to give an account of this form of magic, approved by Al-Ghazali, because it is one of the things by which he is best known among the masses in the world of Islam.

In the older Arabic books on magic this formula plays a comparatively minor part; but after it was taken up by Al-Ghazali and cited in his _Munkidh_ (pp. 46 and 50 of ed. of Cairo, 1303) as an inexplicable, but certain assistance in cases of difficult labour, it came to be universally known as “the three-fold talisman, or seal, or table of Al-Ghazali” (_al-wakf_, _al-khatam_, _al-jadwal_, _al-muthallath lil-Ghazali_) and finally has become the starting point for the whole “Science of Letters” (_ʿIlm ul-huruf_) (_e. g._, Cf. Al-Buni’s Shems ul Muʿarif, A. H. 622). Al-Ghazali is said to have developed the formula, under divine inspiration (_ilham_), from the combinations of letters which open Suras xix. and xlii. of the Koran, and which by themselves are also used as talismans.[55] Others trace the formula back to Adam, from whom it passed down to Al-Ghazali.[56]

For the popular mind _Buduh_ has become a Jinn whose services can be secured by writing his name either in letters or numbers. The uses of the word are most varied to invoke both good and bad fortune. It is used against menorrhagia, against pains in the stomach, to render oneself invisible, against temporary impotence, etc. Lane’s Cairo magician also used it with his ink mirror (“Modern Egyptians,” chap. xii.). We find the same in magical treatises. It is also engraved upon jewels and metal plates or rings which are carried as permanent talismans, and it is inscribed at the beginning of books as a preservative. But by far the most common use is to ensure the arrival of letters and packages.[57] No letter from one pious Moslem to another is ever posted in the Near East without putting the figure 8642 in Arabic on the outside of the envelope where it is sealed. And one may see thousands of children in Egypt who have never heard of Al-Ghazali and cannot read the letters of his name wearing his magic square on lead or silver amulet to protect them from the hideous power of the Child-Witch (Um-as-Subyan). In the Azhar University men study his creed but in the villages they follow his credulity and to all the _fellahin_ of Egypt _Buduh_ has become a guardian Angel!

+---+---+---+
| 4 | 9 | 2 |
+---+---+---+
| 3 | 5 | 7 |
+---+---+---+
| 8 | 1 | 6 |
+---+---+---+

Each letter stands for the number as indicated.

+---+---+---+
| د | ط | ب |
+---+---+---+
| ج | ه | ز |
+---+---+---+
| ح | ا | و |
+---+---+---+

VI

His Writings

“I saw the Prophet in a dream, and he was contending with Moses
and Jesus regarding the superiority of excellence of the Imam
Al-Ghazali, and saying to them, ‘Have you had in your sects
such a learned and righteous man?’ alluding to Al-Ghazali,
and they both replied, ‘No.’ The Shaikh, the Imam, one
acquainted with God, the Master, the support of religious law
and truth, Abu’l-ʾAbbas al-Mursi said, when mention was made
of Al-Ghazali, ‘Testimony has been already borne to his great
and extreme veracity, and it is sufficient for you (to know)
that it was he regarding whom the Prophet contended with Moses
and Jesus, _and to whose great and extreme veracity the most
truthful have borne testimony_.’”

—_Ad-Damiri’s Hayat al-Hayawan._

“Verily I saw in the Gospel of Jesus (on him be peace) that he
said: From the moment the dead is placed on the bier until he
rests on the edge of the open grave God Most High asks of him
forty questions.”

—_Al-Ghazali in Risalat Ayyuha ’l-walad (sec. 5)._

VI

HIS WRITINGS

More by far is known of Al-Ghazali from his writings than from the records of his life. The meagre facts of the biographers and even the spelling of his name, as we have seen, are disputed. His pen, however, left so large a legacy that many of his works are still found only in rare manuscripts, and have never been published. Moslem writers mention ninety-nine works, and Brockelmann in his “History of Arabic Literature” catalogues sixty-nine which are still in existence. They include systems of theology, eschatology, works on philosophy, lectures on mysticism, on ethics, and on canon law.

Many have assigned to Al-Ghazali the highest position among all Moslem writers. Ismael Ibn Mohammed Al Hadrami says: “Mohammed the son of Abdullah was the Prince of all the Prophets; Mohammed the son of Idris Al-Shafiʾ was the Prince of Imams; but Mohammed the son of Mohammed, the son of Mohammed Al-Ghazali, was the Prince of Writers.”

We have interesting evidence of Al-Ghazali’s position as a writer even in his own day in the precious relic shown in our illustration. In the Arabic Museum at Cairo there is a _maqlama_ or pen-case which once belonged to Al-Ghazali. It was presented to the Museum by M. Kyticas and is made of brass overlaid with silver. It bears the following inscription: “_Made for the library of our Master, the most great and noble Imam, our revered Leader, the Mouthpiece of verity, the greatest Scholar of the world, the King of wise men, the Stay of all living, the Treasury of truth, the most illustrious among his contemporaries, the Restorer of religion_, [an illegible word] _Hujjat ul-Islam, Mohammed Al-Ghazali._”

This bronze is the oldest piece of damascened metal work and the only example of that epoch with _naskhi_ inscription in the possession of the Museum. That the case was not made at a later period and presented to Al-Ghazali’s library _after_ his death is evident from the fact that it was the custom to present a book or celestial globe to a library, but not a pen-case or even an inkstand. Then, too, the word “_al-marhum_,” meaning “deceased,” does not appear on it as it does on other objects which were offered in memory of a deceased person. An objection to the authenticity of the bronze is the use of silver in a pen-case designed to be used by a Sufi doctor pledged in some measure to an ascetic life. But this objection may be answered by stating that the case was not made to the order of Al-Ghazali personally, but by his disciples in order to obtain his good-will and patronage.[58]

We need not, moreover, be surprised at the apparent lack of modesty which the inscription on the pen-case indicates. Judging from other instances of this period, Al-Ghazali himself might well have written the inscription.

An almost complete list of Al-Ghazali’s writings as well as of the translations of his works into other languages, especially Hebrew, Latin, French, German, and English, is given in the appendix.[59] Before we speak of some of his more important works a summary will interest the reader. The _Jawahir al-Koran_ (Jewels of the Koran) contains observations on some of the verses of the Koran which have special value; the _ʾAqida_ is a statement of the articles of the Moslem faith, and was published by Pococke in his Specimen; the Precious Pearl (Al-Durrat Al-Fakhira) is a treatise on the last judgment and the end of the world, _i. e._, his eschatology—and has been translated and published by L. Gautier. The morality and theology of the mystics are codified in the _Ihya ʿulum id-din_ (Revivification of the Religious Sciences). The _Mizan Al-ʿamal_ (The Balance of Works) has been translated into Hebrew by Ibrahim bin Hasdai of Barcelona, and published by Goldenthal. The _Kimiya as-saʾada_ (Alchemy of Happiness) is a popular lecture founded on mysticism; this work which was originally written in Persian, has been twice translated into English, by H. A. Homes in 1873 and more recently by Claud Field. _Ayyuha ’l-walad_ (O Child!) is a celebrated moral treatise, which has been translated into German and published by Hammer-Purgstall. Among works on jurisprudence, his treatises on Shafiʾite law have earned great reputation in the Moslem world; his _Basit_, _Wasit_, and _Wajiz_ are all abridgments of them. In the domain of philosophy, the _Tahafut al-Falasifa_ (Collapse of the Philosophers) is an attack on the adherents of the Greek Philosophy; it has been edited by DeBoer. The _Maqasid al-Falasifa_ (Aims of the Philosophers) is a sort of introduction to the above. The text has been published by G. Beer, and a Latin translation by Gondisalvi is in existence, which was printed in Venice in 1506. _Al-Munqidh min ad-Dalal_ (The Deliverer from Error), written after the author commenced his life as a teacher at Nishapur for the second time, describes the development of his philosophy. It was translated and published by Schmolders in his “Essay on the Schools of Philosophy Among the Arabs”; a second and greatly improved translation was published in the _Journal Asiatique_ for 1877, by the learned savant, Barbier de Meynard. More recently it appeared in English under the title “The Confessions of Al-Ghazali.” It is one of his shortest but most famous books and can be compared with the “Confessions” of St. Augustine, or John Bunyan’s “Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners.” Several of Al-Ghazali’s numerous works are very brief, in the shape of epistles or tractates.

Among his shorter works the following may be mentioned: _Al-ʾAdab fi Din_, a short treatise on the ethics of politeness, prepared for the use of his pupils. It speaks of the ideal pupil, the ideal teacher, of the ethics of eating, drinking, marriage and the religious life. A smaller work already mentioned is the _Risala Ayyuh’ Al-Walad_ (“O Child!”). In it he defines faith and works and distinguishes between them. A curious passage occurs in the introduction which reflects on Al-Ghazali’s accuracy of statement, or at least raises the question as to which “Gospel” he refers to. He says: “O my child, live as you please for you are already dead; love whom you wish, for you are bound to be separated; and do what you will, for you are sure to be judged for it. Verily I saw in the Gospel of Jesus (upon Him be prayers and peace) that He said, ‘From the hour in which the dead is put upon the bier until the time when he rests on the edge of the grave God will ask him forty questions, the first of which is, O my servant, you have purified yourself to appear before men many years and not for one hour have you purified yourself for my gates, and every day a voice was sounded in your ears saying, “What you do for others why do you not do for me who surrounds you with my mercy!” but you were deaf and not willing to hear.’”