INFORMATION TO USERSThis manuscript has been reproduced trom the microfilm master. UMI filmsthe text directly fram the original or copy submitted. Thus, sorne thesis anddissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be trom any type ofcomputer printer.The quality of thi. reproduction is depend.nt upon the quallty of thecopy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrationsand photographs, print bleedthrough. substandard margins. and improperalignment can adversely affect reproduction.ln the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also. if unauthorizedcopyright material had to be removed. a note will indicate the deletion.Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced bysectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuingtrom left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.ProQuest Information and Leaming300 North Zeeb Raad, Ann Arbor. MI 48106-1346 USA800-521-0600THE METAPHYSICS OF THE IDEA Of GaD IN IBNTAYMIYVA'S THOUGHTByAbdel Hakim AjharA ThesisSubmitted to the Faeultyof Graduate Studies and Researehln Partial Fulfillment of the Requirementsof the Degree of Doetor of PhilosophyThe Institute of Islamie StudiesMeGiil UniversityMontrealAugust 20001+1 National LibIaryafCanada~ u i s i t i o n s andBibliographie services385 W"'9a" StrMtaea-ON K1A0N4ean.-BibIioIhQue nationaledu canadaAcquisitions etservices bibliographiques385. rue weil"a..ON K1A0N4CINdaThe author bas granted a non..exclusive licence allowing theNational Library of CaDada toreproduce, l o ~ distnbute or seUcopies oftbis thesis in microform,paper or electronic formats.The author retains ownership ofthecopyright in tbis tbesis. Neither thethesis nor substantial extracts nom itmay he printcd or otberwisereproduced without the autbor' spermission.0-612-69960-9CanadlL'autem a accord une licence nonexclusive permettant laBibliothque nationale du Canada dereproduire, prter, distribuer ouvendre des copies de cette thse sousla forme de microfiche/film, dereproduction sur papier ou sur formatlectronique.L'auteur conserve la proprit dudroit d'auteur qui protge cette thse.Ni la thse Di des extraits substantielsde celle-ci ne doivent tre imprimsou autrement reproduits sans sonautorisation. Name:Title :Department:Degree:Abdel Hakim Ajhar"The Metaphysies of the Idea ofGod in Ibn Taymiyya's Thought"Institute of Islamie StudiesPh.D.AbstractThis dissertation deals with Ibn Taymiyya's theory of the unity of God and ofcreation, or, as Muslim philosophers have posited the question, the relation betweenthe oneness of God and the diversity that has come out of il. Indeed, Ibn Taymiyya(d. 728/1328) responded ta the same ontological question that earlier Muslimphilosophers were concerned to answer. Although Ibn Taymiyya was a theologian,he did not encounter quite the same questions as the early kalam theologian whoseconcern it was to praye the existence of God. The dissertation discusses the formsthis question took.The introduction reviews Ibn Taymiyya's life, works and historical circumstans.The tirst chapter deals with Ibn Taymiyya's concept of Gad which is that of a realand actual being. God, for him, is not abstract in the way some Muslim theologians,philosophers and mystics had affirmed.The second chapter discusses two great Muslim thinkers: ai-GhazAli, whoattempted to reconcile kalAm with Ibn SnA's philosophy, and Ibn Rushd, whocriticized both al-Ghazali and Ibn Sna and established a new philosophicalapproach to the notion of Gad and the process of creation. In this chapter we touchon the later development of both kalam and philosophy in Islam and show how IbnTaymiyya, while pursuing the same goal as ai-GhazAli in reconciling kalm andphilosophy, drew beneflt from these developments.The third chapter goes to the core of Ibn Taymiyya's theory of diversityissuing from the oneness of God. This chapter shows the bold notions that IbnTaymiyya believed represent the only possible answers to the question of creation:the essence of Gad as a substrate of generation; the etemity of the world; and Gad'sattributes as species and genera, actualized in our concrete worfd.The conclusion iIIustrates the differences between Ibn Taymiyya and otherMuslim philosophers and theologians, as weil as his adoption of certain of theirideas. Nom:Titre:Dpartement:Diplme:Abdel Hakim Ajhar"Les mtaphysiques de l'ide de Dieudans la pense d'Ibn Taymiyya".Institut des Etudes Islamiques, Universit McGiliDoctorat s Philosophie.RsumCette thse porte sur la thorie d'Ibn Taymiyya de l'unicit de Dieu et de lacration, ou, tel que les philosophes musulmans ont examin la question, la relationentre l'unicit de Dieu et la diversit qui en a dcoul. En effet, Ibn Taymiyya (m.728/1328) a rpondu la mme question ontologique que les philosophesmusulmans furent soucieux de rpondre. Bien qu'Ibn Taymiyya fut thologien, il nefut pas confront aux mmes interrogations que les premiers thologiens du kalamdont la proccupation tait de prouver l'existence de Dieu. l'objectif de cette thsesera donc d'analyser les formes par lesquelles cette question s'est manifest.L'introduction de la recherche passe en revue la vie d'Ibn Taymiyya, sonoeuvre ainsi que le contexte historique de son temps. Le premier chapitre porte surle concept de Dieu d'Ibn Taymiyya qui est un tre rel et actuel. Pour le thologien,Dieu n'est pas donc un tre abstrait tel que reprsent par certains thologiens,philosophes et mystiques musulmans.Le second chapitre analyse l'oeuvre de deux importants penseursmusulmans: al-Ghazali qui a tent de rconcilier le kalam avec la philosophie d'IbnSins, ainsi qu'Ibn Rushd qui, pour sa part, a critiqu la fois al-Ghazali et Ibn Sina.tablissant ainsi une nouvelle approche philosophique de la notion de Dieu et duprocessus de la cration. Dans ce chapitre, nous porterons notre attention sur lesdveloppements ultrieurs du kalam et de la philosophie en Islam afin de dmontrercomment Ibn Taymiyya, alors qu'il poursuivait le mme objectif d'al-Ghazali dansla rconciliation du kalam et de la philosophie, a bnfici de ces mmesdveloppements.Le troisime chapitre est consacr aux fondements de la thorie de ladiversit d'Ibn Taymiyya, qui dcoule de l'unicit de Dieu. Ce chapitre montre lesnotions hardies qui, selon Ibn Taymiyya, reprsentent les seules rponses possibles la question de la cration. Il sera ici question de l'essence de Dieu commesubstrat de la gnration, l'ternit du monde, ainsi que les attributs de Dieu enespces et gnra, actualiss dans notre monde concret.La conclusion de cette recherche illustre les diffrences entre Ibn Taymiyyaet d'autres philosophes et thologiens musulmans, de mme que l'adoption par IbnTaymiyya de certaines de leurs ides.Acknowledgements1 would like to thank my professors at the Institute of Islamic Studies ofMcGiII University, especially Professor Eric Ormsby for his outstanding effortsand skillful judgments in making astute comments and giving appropriate advice.Many thanks also go to Professor Oner Turgay for his administrative skill andcontinuous assurance and encouragement that made the completion of this workpossible. Many thanks are due as weil to Professor Issa Boullata for his readywisdom and availability for discussion of complex ideas. 1would like to thankProfessor Hermann Landolt for his patience throughout the course work andextensive discussions involved in this study.1 would like especially ta thank my wife for her intensive help. for herpatience and tolerance and her support, which made me want to continue thiswork and see it to its conclusion. My special thanks go to the big boy, my sonManar, for his understanding and for the beautiful moments when he insisted that1 leave the computer and play with him. My friend Dr. John Asfour for ail the longhours of valuable discussions and comments concerning the literary techniquesand philosophical treatises that make Ibn Taymiyya's thought moreapproachable.1 would like to thank Mrs. Ann Yaxley for making the distance of ninethousands miles between my work in the U.A.E and the Islamic Institute inMontreal shrinks through her communication skills. Thanks also go to Mr. RichardCooper for his help in editing and reading the manuscript and for ail the commas,dashes, periods and dots he alerted me to.Thanks are also due to ail librarians of the Institute of Islamic studies,especially to Mrs. Salwa Ferahian.Finally 1 would like to thank ail my colleagues in the institute for theirsupport and cooperation and giving any help for my research material needed. Notes on TransliterationThe Arabie to English transliteration system used in this thesis follows thatof the Institute of Islamie Studies. It must be noted that hamzah in the initialposition is omitted, and simply appears in the forms of a, i, u, according to itsvocalization.Arabie English Arabie EnglishHamzae:..-' b c.,,cQc - ' ~t 1? ~..:..:..;..Jth ft ~~t "-.9 h ~gh- ~~ kh ~ f..:> d L.' q;) dh ' k../ r ().-J z r m()--..,;s ()n-~~ Ish hd ~ CS y..,1"" Long vowels ( l, See Ibn 'Abd al-Hadr. al-'Cqid af-Durriyya. where the Ibn Taymiyya's views and the accusationagainst him are clearl) shown: see also "[bn Taymiyya", Encyclopaedia ofIslam. vol. III. p. 952.Ibn explains that his anitude towards the mysticism of Ibn 'Arabwas reversedbecause of the laner's book al-flikam. Before Ibn Taymiyya read he was among those whoheld a good opinion of Ibn .Arab and praised him highly for tlIe useful advice he provides in his books.xxixThis uSful advis is found in th pages of the Reve/ations (a/-Fut/:lat al-Makkiyya), the Essence,the Tiglzt(\, Knit l.1Ild Tied. the Precious Pearl. the Positions ofthe Stars, and similar \\Titings. "One of thefundamental principles of Ibn ' Arabi's teaching laid down in the is that the existence of contingentand created entities is identical with the existence oftheir Creator'. Sec Alexander Knysh, Ibn 'Arabr in theLall?r !s/umic Tradition (Albany: State University of New York. 1999) pp. 97-8. H L lb T . .. 9-". aoust. n aymlyya. p. ,_.Lllb"J 9-" 1 p. ,_.Il' !b"J 9-"f p. '.J.11 Ibid. p. 952.12 Ibn Taymiyya's fun"ii in prohibiting visits to tombs caused hm a great deal of trouble. ft has said that the reaction caused by thisfan,a drove sorne ofhis pupils to leave him out of l'ear ofthosewho were planing to kill Ibn Taymiyya or to cut out his rongue or expel him. In Egypt sorne religious menmet with the Sultan and asked him to kill Ibn Taymiyya. but the Sultan ordered the imprisonmcnt of IbnTaymiyya. According to ibn 'Abd al-Had. the Sultan visited Ibn Taymiyya before the laner's death andasked him to forgive him. and Ibn Taymiyya. we have been told. forgave him and ail those who hated himand intended to harm him. See. and Ibn' Abd al-Hadj, al-' Uqd al-Durr(vya. pp. 343-6. and al-KannT. alKii\l'aklh al-Durr(l:ya. pp. 148-9. & 174-5.Ij H. Laoust. ESSQI slir les doctrines sociales et politiques de Taki-d-dn b. Taim(\'a (LeCare: Imprimerie de l'Institut Franais d'Archologie Orientale. 1939) pp. 353-54. and "Ibn Taymiyya"Encydopat!Jia vflslum. vol, Ill. pp. 952-53.14 C. Brockelmann. GAL Il: 125-117 & Sil: 119-16.15 H. Laoust. "Ibn Taymiyya". p. 951.tl1 Ib-d 9-' 1 p. ,_.1- ibn Taymiyya's book al-Radd 'a/ii (see GAL suppl. p. 114. # 93) or AhlJI-Imiin fi ul-Radd 'ala al-'rinan was abridged by the Shafii scholar JaH1I al-Drn al-Suyt (d.911 1505) almost two centuries after Ibn Taymiyya's death. The new name ofthis abridgement was Jahd/-Qril}a fi Tujrid (The E:certion of Effort in Divesting the Na{ilJa). Tajrfd was editedby 'Alr Samf al-Nashshr and published in 1947 for the first time. Two years laterthe original book of al-Radd was published in 1949 in Bombay. Both al-Radd and Jahd were printed more than one time. In 1993.Wae! E. Hallaq. has translated abridgement ofJahd into English under the title Ibn Taymiyya..tgainst the Greek Logicians. published by the Clarendon Press, Oxford. See Hallaq's Introduction to thebook. especially. pp. liii-iviii.IH L lb T . .. 9-"aoust." n aymlyya, p. "".1'1 Ibn al-Muf;ahhar al-tlills full name is lamaI al-Drn b. Ysuf He was one of the mostprominent Sh' Imams of the 7lcentUf)' of the Hijra. His education was very broad in Arabie grammar.jurisprudence. kalam. and philosophy. AI-tlill accompanied the philosopher al-Din al-TUsi (d.x.xxkalam. and philosophy. AI-tIillI accompanied the philosopher al-Dn al-Ts (d. andleamed from him many topics in kalam and philosophy. He was educated in jurisprudence by Shams al-Onal-Shat and Burhan al-Dl"' al-Nasal (d. 687/1386). He was titled Ayat Allah and al-'Allama and hebendted from the spread of the Shr doctrine during his time and strove to introduce this doctrine to thosewho did not know it yet. It has been pointed out that Ibn Taymiyya wrote his book Jlinhaj al-Sunna al in arder primarily ta refute al-tlill, but Ibn Taymiyya apologized ta him because of the harshanack on al-tIillT when he met him in Mecca during their performance of the pilgrimage. He [eft aconsiderable number of books in Many different branches of the [slamic sciences. Unfortunately, man)' ofthese books are still in manuscript or have been lost. Impanant books like al-Arba'nfi al-Dn, aI-Ta'iim al-' ...fmJi 'I-f:Iikma \l'a 'f-Kalam and the Relation between the Ash' arites and the SophislS are lost. SeeEl:. vol. 3, p. 390: GAL li, p. 21 1 L' - 1.1. ' -k "b l 7l . a -nawa l ,p. .J.21 These}liiw have been compiled and published in 37 vols., in Maktabat al-Ma'arif, al-Ribat..1961 and published by al-Maktab al-Ta'lm al-Su'd, in Riyad, Saudi Arabia. without date.2.2 .tlaJmii' al ul-Rasi il wa 'l-Masa' il was edited by the prominent Islamic reformer MuI:lammadRashd Ri_ .21lh 1 A h' - \' -1- 184a -."'S an.. luqa al. p. "'t '.2117 Ibn Taymiyya. Dur'. vol. 5. pp. 332-3.21lX lb 'd ... 1'. p. J.J .211'1 Ibn Rushd. al-Kushf, pp. 70-5.2111 lb T . D' [- ... '9n aym.yya. ar. vo . ". p. J_ .211 Ibn Taymiyya. J/uwiifaqar. vol. 1. pp. 209-16.".'"- - Ibid. p. 216.213 Ibn Taymiyya. .Uinhiij al-Sunna. \'01. l. p. 112.214 Ibn Taymiyya. .\-Iuwiifaqal. vol. 2. p. 108.215 Ibid. p. 108.21(, .Ibid. pp. 108-9.217 Ibid. p. 109.21X ln Jahd al-QarrJ;.a fi Tajrfd Ibn Taymiyya explains this by refuting thephilosopher's logic ofmaking a distinction between what is essential and what is accidentai in deftning theobject. He says: "They hold that no concept of the definiendum may he formed unless its essentiaiattributes are specifted. They follow this by maintaining that a concept of the essence must frrst he fonnedin order to form a concept of the quiddity. If a person seeking to fonn a concept cannot conceive thedetiniendum without first fonning a concept of its essential qualities. and ifhe does not know that the saidqualities are essential until he forms a concept of the object which is to he qualified-namely. thedetiniendum--and if he cannot fonn a concept of the object qualified until he forms a concept of theessential qualities and distinguishes between them and other qualities. then the apprehension ofthe essencewill depend on the apprehension of what it essential qualities are, and the apprehension ofthe essentia[82qualities will depend on what the apprehension of the essence is. Thus, neitheT the essence nor the essentialqualities will be known. This is a ponentous criticism that destroys the foundations oftheir doctrine anddemonstrates that what they have established is arbitrary and has no foundation or apodictic. truthfulprinciples. They hold. on purely a r b i ~ ' grounds. that one thing is of the essence white another is not.They do not imply any means by which the essential may he distinguished from the non-essential. If thedetiniendum cannat be known without definition. and definition is impossible, then the definiendum cannotbe known. Therefore, their doctrine is false:' Indeed. in his SharlJ al-lsharat. al-Tilsi "acknowledges aproblematic element in the detinition of the essence. tor 'forming a concept of a thing is impossiblewithout first tonning a concept ofwhat is essential to it. This difficulty is multiplied when both Avicennaand al-Tus maintain that the necessary accidentai attributes (a/-' araifi a/-/ii=im ghayr a/-muqawwinr) areidentified not by means of other accidents but rather through the essential attributes. by which. we mustassume, they meant those attributes that they constitute the quiddity:' See Wael Hallaq's translation ofthistreatise under the title Ibn Ta}'miyya Against Greek Logicians (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1993) p. 29, withthe footnote."Il'! .- . Ibn Taymlyya. Muwafaqat. p. 110.':211 Ibid. p. III.221 Ab al-Barakat al-Baghdd in his argument against those who believed in creation out ofnothing and who believed that the world has a beginning, anticipated Ibn Taymiyya in calling themmu' ~ ~ i l a since he assumed as weil that God and His attributes must be etemally active or else somethingprevented Him From operation. See a/-Afu'rabarfi a/-/filcma al-l/iihiyya (Hyderabad. 1358/1939) vol. Ill.p.34.222 al-LmichL K. al-Tamhd, p. 75."12.)- Ibid. p. 78.22'; Ibn Rushd. F~ l al-Afaqii/. pp. 3 1-5.225 Eric Ormsby, Theodicy in Is/amie Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984) pp.151-:!.22li Ibn Taymiyya. Taqrb al-Tadmuriyya. p. 39.227 Ibid. p. 38."l"'S-' Ibid. pp. 36-.0.Chapter IlThe Concept of Generation in the Kalam andin PhilosoQhxThe mutual criticism between the Mutakallimn and the philosophers,which mounted up in the two celebrated refutations written by al-Ghazli and IbnRushd, manifests how Muslim thinkers endeavored to find a proper theory thatwould respond to the question of creation.The main concem of the Mutakallimn is to be found in their insistence onaffirming God's will and power as the sole means by which the universe wascreated. Any theory of creation cannot be admitted, for them, without assertingGod's absolute omnipotence and will. This may have led them to sacrifice aworld-view grounded on causal relations between things, beings and existents intheir existence since things do not have power to affect each other because Godis the sole agent in the universe. The philosophers, on the contrary, wereconcerned to regard the universe as organized and designed according to causalrelations and nexus since other agents besides God, Le., the heavenly spheres,secondary causes, are operating in the universe and are responsible formaintaining things related causally.The discussions between the two parties led each of them to be influencedby the other. AI-Ghazli, who refuted Ibn Sna, had taken the latters views intoconsideration. Likewise, Ibn Rushd, who refuted al-Ghazali, was not able to83ignore the latter's points of criticism. This is why bath al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushdare important: al-Ghazali, because he represents the great attempt to reconcilethe kalam and philosophy by advancing a coherent view of creation thatcombines admission of God's power and will, on the one hand, with causal nexusamong the existents in the universe, on the other hand; and Ibn Rushd becausehe also attempted to re-philosophize the universe in a way that would avoid thefaults his predecessors had fallen into, and by taking into consideration thetraditional and scriptural matters that al-Farabi and Ibn Sina were accused ofhaving ignored.This chapter aims to explore these attempts by a great Mutakallim like al-Ghazali and a great philosopher like Ibn Rushd. But this chapter is not limited tooffering a mere description of both thinkers' points of view. It goes further todemonstrate whether or not these thinkers suceded in removing thediscrepancies and inconsistencies that their discourses (kalam and philosophy)suffered from.It is hard to have an appropriate picture of Ibn Taymiyya's contributionwithout reviewing al-Ghazali's and Ibn Rushd's achievements. Ibn Taymiyyahimself represents another attempt of reconciling the kalm and philosophy. So,his avoidance of al-Ghazali's failures or his being influenced by Ibn Rushd cannotbe recognized without exploring these two thinkers' standpoints on the questionof creation. This question includes many problems to be solved: for instance, thecombination of the will and power of Gad, on the one hand, and the causality inthe world, on the other hand; the problem of how diversity issued from or was84created by one simple unity, i.e., God; the problem of agency or the definition ofaction (fil)-who is the agent and who is not?; and, finally the problem of the unityof God itself-how it can be regarded in a scheme different from that of theMutakallimn, philosophers and mystics.1- The Ka/am Concept of Generation (HudthlThe notion of generation is central to any discussion of Islamic thought. Itis through the theory of generation that other philosophical problems appear: thenature of the created universe and the nature of the relation between it and God.1.1. The World 15 Composed of Atome and AccidentsThe Mutakallimn's attempt to express philosophically the notion of God'somnipotence and capacity for creation was based primarily on depriving thecreated world of any intrinsic efficacy or natural potentialities. They believed in anextreme contrast between Gad as the sole creator and active Agent. on the onehand, and the world as passive and merely an object of God's actions, on theother.1n arder to thematize philosophically both the eternity and agency of Godand the limitation and passivity of the world, the Mutakallimn proceeded to provethe generation and dependence of the world on God's creation by asserting thatthe world, which they defined as "everything other than Gad", (ma siwa Allah)was composed of atoms and accidents Uawahir wa a-ral). They argued that the85accidents (a'raJ) could not endure independently for two instants of time. butwere continually created by God, who creates or annihilates them at will.lThings that make up the created world are corporeal bodies, which areultimately composed of "atoms" and their inhering "accidents". In the doctrine ofAbu al-Hudhayl al-'Aallf, for example, body exists as such through the creation ofthe accidents of composition (ta'Iif), juxtaposition (ijtima). contiguity (mumassa).and conjunction (mujama'a) in the atoms. The body has its specifie configurationas being composed by means of God's power and of atoms and accidents, sincein the composite each accident inheres separately in as many individual atoms asmay belong to il. The reality of the thing, then, in its being what it is, consists ofthe presence of the total complex of its separate accidents inhering in the atomswhich belong to it as their substrate.lThe kalm theory of atoms and accidents was expounded both by manythinkers inside the various "schools" and by their opponents. Herbert Davison hasused al-Farabi to expose the atomistic theory of the early kalm, which hesummarizes as follows:1- Every body is composite.2- Everything composite is joined to and cannat be free of an accident [theaccident of composition itself).3- Everything joined to and not free of an accident is joined to and not free ofwhat is generated.4- Everything joined to and not free of what is generated does not precede whatis generated.865- Everything that does not precede what is generated has its existence togetherwith the existence of what is generated.6- Everything having its existence together with the existence of what isgenerated has its existence after non-existence.7- And everything having its existence after non-existence is generated. But theworld is a body. Consequently, the world is generated.3The basic foundations for the philosophy of the kalam were intended taprove that the difference between Gad and the world is very acute in the sensethat God is the only eternal being in ail respects, while the world has an absolutebeginning and is not only generated, but also depends for ail its components andcontinuation on Gad's power. God with His attributes is etemal, unchangeableand absolutely remote in whatever circumstances. whereas the world isgenerated and lacks any sort of individual autonomy.The principle that what is joined to what is generated and does notprecede the generated is absolutely generatedn4is a favorite dictum that themajor schools of the kalam adopted. This principle represents, as weil. the rootsof the kalam's philosophy in the early perio