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