Theodicy in Islamic Thought
“BEST OF ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS”
3K Eric L. Ormsby
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS
|
| THE DISPUTE OVER AL-GHAZALI’S
1
3
}
| PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
umiversity OF TOLEDO LIBRARIES=
Preface
Ta this work, I describe and analyze the major themes and
arguments in longlved but litleaown debate among Mur
lim theologians, My fst concern has ben to present these themes
snd arguments as cearly and as acurately as 1 cou, and t do
40, as often a6 possible, to the words ofthe dspatats them.
‘elvet. This seemed espacilly important to me, since much of
the material which Ihave used exits only in manuscript and 20
fs ot always easly accessb.
Thave arranged the stody topically and have grouped the
incl arguments around tres centr problems: divine power
nd possi; divine will nd neces, sad divine etic and
bligatin, In adopting this course, Thave followed «prosedare
‘fen sed bythe diputants themselves fn their trates. Thad
Hest considerod ansyzing the debate from a hstorcal view-
Doin, but it quickly became clear to me that such an approach
‘would be impracticable. The aguinents inthe debate were cx
‘molative; each dispotant built spon, and recapitulate, th at-
tents of his predecessors. A chronolgial approach wold
fave involved elther cotinal repetition and restatement ora
‘artow concentration on one or two stages ofthe debate. In my
‘pinion, eilher course would have misrepresented the sgn
‘canoe and potential interest of the debate
a dieussing the arguments nthe debate, Uhave oxasionally
Included reforeces to parallel auments and themes in West
‘ern discussions of theodiy. I did this bocause the subject may
be ofinteres to students of helogy and philosophy beyond the
specialized ares of Near Eastern tudes, However, 1 wo0ld not
wat to obscure the fc that such references are often problen
“They ace expecially inthe inten whore reference i made
to pore ancient soutees—and spesflly, Stole sour forvii PREFACE.
Tater Ilmle notions and concepts. While it seems undeniable
that Moslin authors, ftom an early dat, had acess to Stoic
thought (or certain poctions thereof, sil unclear by what
‘means, of in wht form, Stic ides came to them, The rane
‘ison of certain Stoic tatios to Musi plosphers and the
Clogian i sll vesed question, Nevertheles, I fet that to
‘omit such oferencos to possible sources would have been, i is
‘own way, equally misesding, In any exe, these references, 35
‘well a others to medieval Scholle and modern Western phi
Tosophors, ae offered here mare in the itor of comparizn,
nd a astanoes of pall formulations, thn out of any desire
(o suggest, or floras proved, any direct transmission of dear
coc compler of infvences.
‘The thea central problems of the dispute, which 1 treatin
Chapters Thee through Fie below, represent quite complex
nd sgninat constellations of problems within the contet of
Idlanie-theolgy. Bach might warrant « separate and detailed
luoatinent i i ow ight. My tnteret as boon to lar the
(Gen tact) fester a rather intent and protracted lps,
tnd 50 1 make no dai to oer here define discussions of
"hese three problemt; rather, I ave tried to spproach them only
2 they had bearlag on the dispute ise
would ike to thank sever individual who have helped me
doring the longtime ic as taken ie to complete thi study. My
teacher, mentor, and frend, the Inte Profesor Rudolf Mach,
frst suggested this ope to me and made ealable the rlovant
‘Arabic manuscripts from the Prneaton University Librarys Car-
‘at and Yehuda Callotons He was always unalingly generous
‘wth his tne and with sgyestion fr the improvement ofthe
‘work. Tn adton, he allowed me. to so, and ite fom, Ne
extensive lela les of Arabic technical tarninaogy; without
‘ese, certain sections ofthe work and espeally Chapter Thee,
‘would fave been dificult deed to write, Furthermore, at wy
footnotes atest, he was most generous in suggesting farther
oures chat have enriched the work. T have aio profited fom
his presi and musnoed sent of langue, which hae iproved
the ste ofthe workin many places My indebtedness o Rudolf
‘Mach can now never be repaid, but Ile this work, imperfect
PREFACE, ®
2 it to the memory of an fcomparable sel and wacer
hd a nagoasenous fend
should alto tke to thank Professors Manfred Ullman and
Josef van Esto the University of Tbingen, with whos Ts
Jrvoged to sod and who tase bell tome inte easiy
ager of is work {thank he Dever Aladentacher Aus
tunis (DAAD) or sling this year of study psnble.
lo gute to De Keanery 1, Woody my ed nf
toe colleague atthe Prcston Univer Library. and to Pro
[Eno Calvin Normore,frmery af Princo’ Pisophy De-
tortment, for sever! ill references t Scola sures
Dr, Hale! Dansger Kindly sggeted references peaing
vcetiy Algeria ao rtf wo Me Lazy Miler or
tere suggertion od for is enooroement
Tam indebled to Dr. Ort L Pelty my fend and former
colleague atthe Prncston University Libary, fr ganerouly
Celuncering to cea the sate mnuiep inner brs
Tis metclousstenton 10 det and seae of se havo
Inproved the work gel, nd have incorporated many of his
"Thank Dr, Dster George of th Stusibthek, Wei Ber
ln, for forking me wih rfl pies of s-Chuss a
Imi aod ambos Tesh ebay, 18m so gael oe
Frincsten University Library fr allowing me 0 re the Arabic
‘Bunsen ncomparecalectons
“Tis works rvaton of ty doctoral dteraton which 1
sultan May 198 tthe Depatnent of Ne astra Stules
of trincton Unto, Ihave reved snd coneted the work
rouphout and bree rewritten several rections completly. T
‘Bowl! et hak he Beal of at deparaent the po
tence and encouragement Tam especaly ptf o Prosar
Jerome Clinton, Jokn Maks, nd Roy P. Mostabwdeh for thet
ve sad support
Tao wiht thank Professors George F. How nd Mi
cel E. Marmors forsaking arable tote reader
yore fr Pact Uniesty Pret The sommes ve sed
toe several errs and guide new fre sources whch
Eve improved th wore {Rave incorporated ther sagestons