Al- Ghazālī’s View on Women: A Comparison with Ibn Rushd

Al- Ghazālī ’s View on Women: A Comparison with Ibn Rushd

1  

1  

Table  of  Contents    

1.1.Preface 2

1.2. Introduction 5 2. Plato and Aristotle Views on Women 9

2.1. Plato views of women 9

2.2. Aristotle views of women 12

3. The Status of Women in Islam in Medieval Era 15

3.1. Women in Islamic Law 16

4. Al-Ghazālī 17

4.1. Al- Ghazālī’s work and influence 18

4.2. Women in al-Ghazālī Work 18

4.3. Sufism effect on Al Ghazālī’s 30

4.4. Plato and Aristotle influence of Al-Ghazālī 32

5. Ibn Rushd (Averroes)

5.1 Ibn Rushd’s Work and Influence 33

5.2 Plato and Aristotle influence on Ibn-Rushd 37

5.3 Women in Ibn Rushd’s Writings and View 38

6. Conclusion 46

7. Bibliography 53

2  

2  

1.1 Preface

Being a good Muslim always meant to know the Kitâb1 and the Sunna and, if

privileged, to have an access to al-Ghazālī’s Ihya’ ‘ulum al-Din.

I was one of those privileged who had the Ihya’ on the shelves of my library and easily

referred to it each time I had difficulty understanding or performing a rule of God in my

daily life.

Somehow, we are sometimes forced to make a detour, or a U-turn, when regular

routes do not work anymore.

One day I woke up as a divorced woman, and my journey of observing ‘ibāda

(devotion to God) took a different turn. I started working on an academic paper that

discussed the situation of Muslim women in Jerusalem with regards to tradition and

religion, and there I met al-Ghazālī again. This time not as the great scholar who

helped me interpret God’s orders in the right way, but as the man whom Muslim

feminists may charge with responsibility for the deterioration in the status of women in

the Islamic world today.

I was taken by a real shock, reading his Kasr al-Shahwataiyn,2 I was entering a feeling

of awe, thinking that my language skills both in Arabic and in English must have been

defeating me, and then researching al-Ghazālī, thinking that maybe it was another al-

Ghazālī that was meant.

However, the al-Ghazālī I met in the course of writing this academic paper was the

same one who had accompanied my life of a good wife.

I started researching al-Ghazālī, trying to break the myth of a great scholar, even as

his followers staunchly defended him. Scholars of al-Ghazālī are eloquent, well-

spoken people who either try to follow Sufism, which makes them appear as “mystical”

                                                                                                                         1  Kitâb  is  another  word  for  Qur’an  used  by  Muslims.  2  Ihya’   ‘ulum  al-­‐Din,   3rd  Quarter:  The  Ways   to  Perdition   (Rub’  al-­‐Muhlikat)  Book  23:  On  Breaking   the  Two  Desires.  

3  

3  

people to non-followers of Sufism; or follow a line of moderate Islam that is not as

strict as the Ibn Taymiya’s School 3, and this makes them look liberal.

Al-Ghazālī in today’s Muslim world is represented as a “Muhyi”(Reviver), “Hujjat al-

Islam” (proof of Islam), the scholar, the Imam who saved the Muslim world from the

darkness of the hardliners of the Ibn-Taymiya school4 and fought fanatical

fundamental teaching.

Comparing al-Ghazālī to ibn-Taymiya makes the former look moderate. However,

classifying Islamic scholars as falling into either Ibn-Taymiya’s or al-Ghazālī’s camps

is definitely not the right approach.

People like myself, in my previous marital life, represent al-Ghazālī’s followers, people

who perceive him as the liberator from fanatical Islam and a moderate Sufi scholar.

All this could have a lot of truth; al-Ghazālī contributed much to the teachings of Islam,

and his contributions through his written work are invaluable. But what al-Ghazālī

represents when it comes to women issues definitely shows no signs of moderation.

For this reason, I intend to examine al-Ghazālī ’s works with a special focus on the

status of women.

While feminist writers and scholars such as the Moroccan author Fatima Mernissi

scrutinized the works of al-Ghazālī and accused him of being a misogynist; other

                                                                                                                         3 “Ibn Taymiya, Taqi al-Din (1263-1328) was a staunch defender of Sunni Islam based on strict adherence to the Qur'an and authentic Sunna (practices) of the Prophet Muhammad. He believed that these two sources contain all the religious and spiritual guidance necessary for our salvation in the hereafter. Thus he rejected the arguments and ideas of both philosophers and Sufis regarding religious knowledge, spiritual experiences and ritual practices. He believed that logic is not a reliable means of attaining religious truth and that the intellect must be subservient to revealed truth. He also came into conflict with many of his fellow Sunni scholars because of his rejection of the rigidity of the schools of jurisprudence in Islam. He believed that the four accepted schools of jurisprudence had become stagnant and sectarian, and also those they were being improperly influenced by aspects of Greek logic and thought as well as Sufi mysticism. His challenge to the leading scholars of the day was to return to an understanding of Islam in practice and in faith, based solely on the Qur'an and Sunna.” Today, Ibn Taymiya is adopted by Salafi traditions that are considered mostly fundamentalist and orthodox in their views in general and on women in particular. See: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H039.htm.(retrieved Oct.21.2014).

4  Even   though   Ibn  Taymiya  came  after  al-­‐Ghazālī,  but   this   is  how   the   two  schools  are  perceived   in   today’s  societies.      

4  

4  

scholars such as Caesar E. Farah idealized him and considered him as a reviver of

Islamic thought.5

In trying to understand his thoughts and works, it is not a surprise to be in a state of

perplexity upon researching al-Ghazālī. Al-Ghazālī is known to the scholarly world and

to interested lay readers primarily through his two major works, Ihya’ Ulum al-Din and

al-Munqidh min al-dhalal.

The Ihya’ is followed by people like I was in my previous journey who consider it as a

guide to their dhalal (error) in our different aspects of living. The Ihya’’ serves as an

encyclopedia to the Muslim seeker of God’s best path. It is divided into ‘ibadat (acts of

devotion), adat (matters of behavior) muhlikat (the Destructive Evils) and munajiyat

(the Saving Virtues). Therefore, a Muslim does not need to consult any other

reference after reading the Quran, except for al-Ghazālī’s work, which is easy to read,

is eloquent, and moderate; while envisioning language and guidance.

In addition, for the Muslim avid reader, al-Ghazālī has a good place in literature. The

Munqidh is presented as an autobiography of a wanderer and a truth seeker that

captures the sympathy of the reader and summarizes al-Ghazālī’s life experience in

his own words and narrative.

                                                                                                                         5 Wener, Rebecca. Gender and Space in Arabic-Islamic Countries. Mount Holyoke College, (15,May, 2007). Fatima Mernissi, for instance, discussed in her book, Beyond the Veil, the Islamic sexual morality in a discussion that centers on the views of al-Ghazālī on female sexuality. Mernissi attacks the concept of female sexuality in Islam, as she has understood it from al-Ghazālī. Mernissi argues that it is not just about men being in control, but about women as being accused of being the source of evil in having power that men do not have. See: Mernissi, Fatima. The Veil and The Male Elite. Translated by Mary Jo Lakeland. NY: Perseus Publishing, (1991),p.43. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/mjiyad/forum/messages/221.shtml.

5  

5  

1.2 Introduction

The place of women in society has been subjected to scrutiny and has

been disputed for a long time as many societies regard them inferior. Different

myths about the creation of women provide material for debate about their status

from ancient figures like Ishtar6, Athena, Aphrodite, Hera7 with their different

capacities and down to Eve, the wife who tempted Adam into intemperate

behavior that came to bedevil the human race. The process of demonizing

women has not only occurred within the structures of traditional monotheistic

religions, but had existed even before these religions took form.

Islam projected itself with the image of liberation and empowerment for the

weak, slaves, and women: it was Islam that prohibited the burying of girls alive,

and improved the status of women. The wives and daughters of the prophet

were important examples of women playing central roles in society.

Still, one should not ignore that before Islam, too, women belonged to the elite

of the Arab nation. Prominent female figures such as Khadija,8 Hind bint Utbah9

and others come to mind.10

During the early years of Islam, women also took part in war. The famous story

of dhat al-Nitaqayn (the One with the Two Waistbands); Asma bint Abi Bakr11

                                                                                                                         6  Ishtar-­‐Inana  is  the  Babylonian  goddess  of  fertility,  love,  war,  and  sex.  7  Aphrodite   is  a  well-­‐known  Greek  goddess  of   love,  beauty,  sex  appeal,  and   fertility.  Hera   is   the  goddess  of  women   and   marriage   and   she   is   the   queen   of   the   heaven.   Athena   is   the   Greek   virgin   goddess   of   reason,  intelligent  activity,  arts  and  literature.  8  Khadija  bint  Khuwaylid  (555–620  CE)  was  the  first  wife  of  Prophet  Mohammad.  She  was  the  first  person  to  convert  to  Islam,  and  herself  a  thriving  businesswoman  of  Quraish.  9  Hind   bint   ‘Utbah  was   the  wife   of   Abu   Sufian   ibn  Harb,   a   powerful  man   of  Mecca.   Both  Abu   Sufian.  Hind  originally   opposed   Prophet  Muhammad.   She  was   the  mother   of  Mu’awiyah   I,   the   founder   of   the  Umayyad  dynasty.  She  is  well  known  for  the  actions  she  took  against  the  Muslim  community  before  her  conversion.    10  Women  always  played  a  significant  role   in  Arab  history,  which  even  had  a  matriarchal  period.  After   the  demise   of   the   Arab   matriarchies   the   privileged   position   of   Arab   women   persisted,   as   reflected   in  matrilineality-­‐genealogical   filiation   through   the  mother  rather   than   the   father,  a  distinctive   feature  of  Arab  society.  Matronymics   such   as   Ibn  Mariya,   Ibn  Hind,   and   Ibn   Salma  where   affiliated   names  with   Ghassanid  kings.   See:  Shahid   Irfan,  Byzantium  and   the  Arabs   in   the  Sixth  Century,  Volume  2,   Harvard  University   Press.  (2009),  p.83.    11  Asma’  Bint  Abu  Bakr  was  the  daughter  of  Abu  Bakr  as-­‐Siddiq.    She  was  the  elder  sister  of   ‘Aisha  and  the  mother  of  `Abdullah  Ibn  az-­‐Zubair.    She  accepted  Islam  very  early  in  Mecca.  She  gave  pledge  to  the  Prophet  and  firmly  believed  in  him.    

6  

6  

who fled with the prophet from Mecca to Medina is a good example.12 After the

death of the Prophet, his wife Aisha was considered a trustworthy source for

Hadith among the Sunni. She herself participated in battles, including the

infamous Battle of the Camel (al-Jamal).13

In other words, one can cite many stories that demonstrate that women in the

early days of Islam were not just living well; but also they were taking leading

positions in social and political life.

In the formative centuries of Islam onwards, however, the weakened situation

of women came to the surface when theologians and scholars such as al-

Ghazālī according to C.E.Farah’s introduction to his translation of al-Ghazālī’s

Kasr al-Shahwataiyn that “ the codes of behavior for families and women,

elucidating laws and theories with verses from the Quran and Hadith and

forming what would become the codes for women’s conduct until this day.” 14

This paper will attempt to show the effects of the teachings of al-Ghazālī and Ibn

Rushd on the role of woman in Muslim societies, and how the teachings of earlier

Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle influenced their views. To accomplish

this, the background of this paper will briefly look at the views of Plato and Aristotle

regarding women in Ancient Greek and will try to shed light on the resemblance or

influence, if any, of Plato’s and Aristotle’s schools on the thoughts of the medieval era

of Islam.

This paper will try to explore the relationship between al- Ghazālī’ thoughts and rules,

and the political and social situation during his time and how much this influenced his

writings. Today, many scholars agree that al-Ghazālī was not just a seeker of

                                                                                                                         12  In  the  Prophet  Mohammad  and  Abu  Bakr  attempt  to  migrate  to  Medina,  Asma  used  to  carry  food  to  them  at   night.   She   tied   the   goods   with   the   two   belts   of   her   cover,   and   she   received   the   title   Dhat   a   Nitaqayn  meaning    (She  of  the  Two  Belts).    13  Aisha  played  a  key  role  in  the  lives  of  two  caliphs,  and  she  contributed  to  the  destabilization  of  the  third,  Othman  by  refusing  to  help  him  when  he  was  besieged  in  his  house.  She  contributed  as  well  to  the  downfall  of  Ali;  the  fourth  caliph  by  taking  command  of  the  opposing  army,  which  challenged  his  legitimacy  Aisha,  led  an  army   against  Ali,  but  was   defeated   in   the   Battle   of   the   Camel.   The   engagement   derived   its   name   from   the  fierce  fighting  that  centered  on  the  camel  upon  which  Aisha  was  mounted.  Captured,  she  was  allowed  to  live  quietly   in  Medina.  See:  Mernissi,  Fatima.  The  Veil  and  the  Male  Elite.  New  York:  Basic  Books.  Perseus  Books  Publishing  (1987),  p.  5.  14  Al-­‐Ghazālī’.  Curbing  the  Two  Appetites.  Trans.  C.  Farah  http//:www.ghazali.org/works/abstin.htm.  P.21.  

7  

7  

knowledge, but he was always a man involved in political context of his time. In his

book The First Islamic Reviver, Kenneth Garden discusses the letters that al-Ghazālī

sent to the Sultans and his close relation to the Seljuk vizier Nizam al-Mulk and later

with his son. In between the rule of the father and the son, al-Ghazālī took his famous

journey.

Al-Ghazālī’s own narrative in the Munqidh does not really prove his intentions. What

we know from al-Ghazālī in his Munqidh is that he decided to leave his prestigious life

and to give up the teaching of the 300 students of his Madrassa (college) and leave

his family in order to start a search for answers to his perplexity and dhalal (error).

The reason for this speculation is simple: the Ihya’ as an inclusive work that relates to

every single aspect of life. It has precise instructions and directions to a Muslim’s way

of life. It has answers to every question that undoubtedly needed to be prepared in an

office and not under a tree.

Al- Ghazālī was a scholar with an agenda of which he never let go since the beginning

of his service under Nizam al-Mulk.

Having said this, the paper will attempt to make an observation on how al-Ghazālī’s

writing on women changed from one work to another. The paper will mainly discuss;

the following works: the Ihya’, the Mizan and the Naṣiḥat al Muluk.

As mentioned earlier, the Muslim world today adopts two schools of thought, al-

Ghazālī’s and Ibn Taymiya’s; taking into consideration the generalization of this

statement, and whether intentionally or not ignores what maybe a major school of

thought that can stand in moderation between the schools of al-Ghazālī and Ibn

Taymiya. For this reason, the paper aims to shed light on Ibn Rushd who is as well

vibrant in his presence in today’s Muslim world, but his thought is not well understood,

and remains limited in his presence in academic and intellectual circles.

Ibn Rushd discusses the issue of women on a different level than al-Ghazālī. Ibn

Rushd is also a celebrated scholar and theologian who is widely respected in today’s

Islamic scholarly world. However, the well-known thoughts and teachings of Ibn

8  

8  

Rushd concentrates on his Tahafut at-Tahafut which came as a response to al-

Ghazālī’s infamous Tahafut al Falasifa, and in many scholarly circles, researchers

busy themselves in refuting his Tahafut for the benefit of that of al-Ghazālī’s.

In this work I will shed light on Ibn Rushd’s views on women through exploring some

of his works, mainly; The Commentary on Plato’s Republic, Fasl al-Maqâl, and

Bidayat al-Mujtahid.

Ibn Rushd’s works have been explored and adopted in the West centuries before he

was acclaimed as a Muslim thinker. Ibn Rushd was known to the West as Averroes

and his contributions to the Enlightenment Era of the West were highly appreciated

and acknowledged.

As mentioned earlier, Ibn Rushd’s ideas are circulated among Muslim scholarly

teachings within a critical introduction that presents his views as unnecessarily open

and unsuitable to Islamic societies, using al- Ghazālī’ as the model for moderate

thinking between two poles of thinking that Ibn Rushd represents its other side of the

pole. Ibn Rushd is also described as an elitist scholar unlike al-Ghazālī’ who is

perceived as a modest observer.

Even though the focus of the research is around al- Ghazālī’s views on women, it is

the complexity of al-Ghazali’s positions that makes the focus more on his views. Ibn

Rushd’s views from the other hand are more simplistic and direct when it comes to his

expressions and belief in the matter, which makes the research in regards with him

with less need to explain his views with the need of further explanations as in the case

of al-Ghazālī’.

9  

9  

2. Plato and Aristot le Views on Women

Plato and Aristotle brought a philosophical methodology to the idea of

women’s roles that created the structure of distinctive ideas on different extremes.

Plato thinks that: “ the females bear children while the males beget them. We’ll say

there has been no kind of proof that women are different form men.”15

Aristotle however, believes that: “the relation of men and women is that of ruler and

ruled, men and women have distinct virtues due to their distinct functions, although

women have the capacity to deliberate, their reason lacks authority, and while a man

can possess practical intelligence the most a woman can achieve is true opinion”.16

According to Prudence, Plato is the founder of the sex unity theory; Aristotle is the

founder of sex polarity and sex neutrality theories.17

Plato however, also had some polarity in his works. Sex unity is generally found in the

Republic and Laws, and sex polarity in the Timaeus. The Symposium with its central

role for Diotima supports the equality of man and woman in the category of Wisdom.18

2.1 Plato’s views on women

Plato discusses women directly and indirectly in his different works. It is nevertheless

important to investigate what may sometimes appear contradicting views in the

different works.

                                                                                                                         15  Plato.  The  Republic,  http://www.idph.net.  (5  18,  2002)  (accessed  5  1,  2014),  p.  454e.  16 Jawin, Alexandra. The Ideal Role of Women in Plato's and Aristotle's Societies . (2012), pp. 112-13.See: (pol.1.13) 17 Sex polarity: the notion that men and women are significantly different and men are superior to women. Sex unity, the notion that men and women are not significantly different and those they are equal.

18  Prudence,  A.  Plato,  Aristotle,  and  The  Concept  of  Woman  in  Early  Jewish  Philosophy.  Social  Sciences  and  Humanities  Research  Council  of  Canada,  (1987).  

10  

10  

The Republic is the ideal state in Plato’s thought. He addresses the issue of the role of

women in Book V through indirectly advocating the inclusion of women into the elite

class of guardians, by saying that the guardian class is comprised of only the most

excellent individuals. He explains his vision of the best community, and in the book he

mentions the different roles and matters needed in the community.19 He says:

And if, I said, the male and female sex appear to differ in their fitness for any art or pursuit, we should say that such pursuit or art ought to be assigned to one or the other of them; but if the difference consists only in women bearing and men begetting children, this does not amount to a proof that a woman differs from a man in respect of the sort of education she should receive; and we shall therefore continue to maintain that our guardians and their wives ought to have the same pursuits.20

Plato further challenges the capability of women in performing certain tasks just as

men in accordance with their skills and talents not with their nature.

After a series of positive confirmations to the questions he poses, he takes an

opportunity to make his final assessment by confirming that men and women alike

possess qualities that make a guardian; that they only differ in their comparative

strength or weakness.21

However, there are obvious places where Plato makes derogatory remarks on women, both in the Republic and other works. In the same book (book V), for instance he states:

I hardly like even to mention the little meanness’s of which they will be rid, for they are beneath notice: such, for example, as the flattery of the rich by the poor, and all the pains and pangs which men experience in bringing up a family, and in finding money to buy necessaries for their household, borrowing and then repudiating, getting how they can, and giving the money into the hands of women and slaves to keep–the many evils of so many

                                                                                                                         19  Jawin,  p.6.  20  Plato.  The  Republic,  http://www.idph.net.  5  18,  2002.  (accessed  5  1,  2014)  book  V,  p.  311.  

21 Plato. The Republic, Book V, p.313.

11  

11  

kinds which people suffer in this way are mean enough and obvious enough, and not worth speaking of.22

Plato never used the nature of women as the explanation of his critical views about

their behavior. Even though Plato uses nature in many arguments, but never when it

comes to women. He often offers criticism on women’s behavior in Athens, but when it

comes to women in his ideal city who will be raised under ideal circumstances will be

judged by the quality of their souls, and those who are qualified to become guardians

will be rigorously educated.

He even gives a woman a more strategic role in defending the state against the

enemy as a Guardian.

Plato implies that men and women have the same abilities and it is not just limited to

the guardian class, but also to medicine and music. Even though he says that women

are weaker than men at the end of the sentence, but he does not limit women from

being guardians, as much as men, however, he believes that everyone is raised to

serve the state to his or her best, whether it a man or a woman.

For Plato, a city he idealizes is a city which functions harmoniously, and the ideal city

will run more smoothly when every citizen performs the function they are suited for.

One must also note though that Plato is equally as critical of men for having the same

misrule in the soul. Plato tends to stress the fact that women behavior is a result of the

society that raises her and not her nature.23

“The popular review that women’s role in the reproductive process is a sign of the type

of soul women possess is not even acknowledged with Plato. Plato makes no

mention of any physical process that signifies the quality of one’s soul, and hence, by

                                                                                                                         22  Plato.  The  Republic,  Book  V,  p.324.  

23 Plato. The Republic, Book V, p. 314. 24 Jawin. P.19.

12  

12  

no means does the biological differences between men and women, affect their ability

to reach the same philosophical level”24.

Giving Birth for Plato is a purely physical rather than an emotional or a spiritual

process. For once the children are born there is no sense that the female Guardians

will feel any loss or desire to raise a child. Giving birth is just a routine. For Plato, the

ideal role of women in his state is whatever her nature allows her best to do.25

In the Republic, he discusses the issue of women, because he cannot discuss the

subject of an ideal state without half of his population. However, the Symposium,

where the issue of sex and the role of women in the state are not addressed nor are

women much discussed, Diotima26 presents the issue.

When it comes to family Plato removes the traditional model of the family in his

Republic. For him a woman is guardian first and foremost who has the extra duty of

giving birth to future citizens.

Generally, Plato appoints to women a part almost equivalent to that of men.

2.2 Aristotle views on women

Aristotle does not aim to create the ideal state nor radically alter the society

like Plato. In the Generation of Animals,27 in Chapter 1 of Book IV he says when he

discusses the nature of sexes:

Since male and female are distinct in the most perfect of hem, and since we say that the sexes are first principles of all living things whether animals or plants, only in some of them the sexes are separated and in others not, therefore we must speak first of the origin of the sexes in the latter. For while the animal is still imperfect in its kind the distinction is already made between male

                                                                                                                         24  Jawin.  P.19.  25  Ibid.  P.33.  26 When Socrates begins his accounts of the Eros he declares: “ I shall try to go through for you the speech about love I once heard from a woman of Mantinea, Diotima- a woman who was wise about many things besides this: once she even put off plague for ten years by telling the Athenian what sacrifices to make. She is the one who taught me the art of love, and I shall go through her speech and best I can on my own.” (Symposium 201d) See: Prudence, SR. Allen. , P. 57. 27 The Generation of Animals is referred to in Latin as De Generation Animalium.

13  

13  

and female.”28

And in affirmation of this statement he continues: The male and female are distinguished by a certain capacity and incapacity. The female is that which receives semen, indeed, but cannot form it for itself or secrete or discharge it. …The female is opposite to the male, and is female because of its inability to concoct and of the coldness of the sanguineous nutriment.29

In his Political Community Text in On Politics he admits that there is a need to unite

things that cannot exist separately, and the need to reproduce is not by choice but by

nature. However, he sees that this will result in a ruler and a ruled relationship that are

by nature united for their welfare. “For those who can intellectually foresee things are

by nature rulers and masters, and those who can physically do things are by nature

subjects and slaves. And so the same thing benefits masters and slaves. Therefore, it

was out of the two associations of men and women and of master and slaves that the

first household arose.”30.

Since the structure is obvious to Aristotle in whom societies run is that of a ruler and a subject, he deliberates his next level of community in the household:

The household has parts from which it has also been established, and the complete household consists of slaves and free persons. But we should first study everything from its smallest parts, and the first, smallest parts of the household are master and slaves, husband and wife, and father and sons. Therefore, it will be necessary for us to consider what each of the three is, and what each should be. The first is despotic, the second marital, and the third reproductive, although the latter two have no exact name. And let us consider these three things that we mentioned. 31

His second part of household management is about wives and children. He insists on treating the relation as a relation between subject and rulers; he says:

                                                                                                                         28  Aristotle.   Generation   of   Animals,   Book   IV,   Ch1.   Trans:   Arthur   Platt.     Web   Edition   published   by  eBooks@adelaide.  Last  updated  26.2.2014.  The  University  of  Adelaide  Library.  S.Australia.  29Ibid. 30  Aristotle.   Thomans   Aquinas   Commentary   of   Aristotle's   Politcs.   Book   I   Ch.1   Political   Community   Text  (1252a1–1253a38),   eBook.   Translated   by   Richard   J.Reagan.   Cambridge:   Hacket   Publishing   Comapany,Inc,  (2007).    31 Ibid. , Chapter 2 Household and Slavery (1) Text (1253b1–1254a17).

14  

14  

We should consider in general about subjects and rulers by nature whether they have the same or different virtue. For if both need to share in noble character, why will it be necessary that one always rule, and another always is a subject? For it is impossible for them to differ by more and less, since being a subject and being a ruler differ specifically, not to a degree. And if the one needs to have virtues, and the other does not, this is astounding. For if the ruler will not be self-controlled and just, how will he rule well? And if subjects lack virtue, how will they be good subjects? For one who lacks self-control and is cowardly will not perform his duties. 32

When it comes to virtue, it is clear for him that both need to share in virtue, but

differences exist between them ‘naturally’ and for him the situation is that; “free

persons rule over slaves in one way, males over females in another way, and men

over children in still another way. And parts of the soul are present in all of them but in

different ways. For slaves completely lack deliberation, females have it but weakly,

and children have it only imperfectly.” 33

Since Aristotle believes in a political community, and women represent in any case

half of the numbers, he agrees that the education of women is important to the

community by stating: “ it is necessary to educate both women and children regarding

the regime, if it makes a difference for the political community that children and

women are virtuous. And it necessarily does. For women represent a half of the free

persons, and children become stewards of the regime34.

“Aristotle asserts that women’s souls are less forceful than male souls. Women’s lack

of spirit entails that they are less emotional in regard to emotions connected to “spirit”

rather than less emotional in regard to the appetites”35.

“According to Aristotle, women are intelligent, capable of deliberation, and of giving

logical advice, so it is not that women cannot deliberate logically, but that emotions

                                                                                                                         32 Ibid. Chapter 10 Family Text (1259a37–1260a36) (Aquinas, pp. 66-70). 33 Ibid. 34 Ibid. Book 2 Chapter 3 Common Wives and Sons Text (1262a24–1262b36).

35  Jawin.  P.126.  

15  

15  

are likely to overpower their deliberations. This makes them differ from slaves, who

have no reason whatsoever, and children who have reason but use it imperfectly.”36

In marriage, and what Aristotle calls friendship between husband and wife; Jawin

argues that he recognizes that women are necessary for domestic happiness as well

as reproduction. The type of marriages he describes required that both parties exhibit

excellences of their respective sex, so even though men and women have different

excellences, both must be sufficiently competent to contribute to the family. He

expects women to contribute to the family, if not in equal measure to the men then at

least significantly.

Aristotle still thinks, Jawin affirms, that both men and women have distinct functions

that neither can do better than the other, and of course the reason women have

distinct functions from the men is due to the fact that he believes that women have

distinct natures. But yet he doesn’t belittle women’s contributions to household.37

3. The Status of Women in Islamic Medieval Era

The formative period of Islamic law38 is generally agreed to include the first

three centuries of Islam, the 7th through the 9th centuries C.E. In which the major

topics and problems of law had been debated and established.

“Early Muslim Scholars were conscious of living within a polity that had to be reckoned

within their envisioning of an ideal Islamic order of society, they were incapable of

envisioning an Islam without Islamic government and law. In the later Muslim accounts

these scholars would be characterized as Ahl al Ra’y, (People of Opinion).”39

                                                                                                                         36  Jawin.  p.126.  37  Jawin,  p.138.  38 Wael Hallaq defines the formative period as that historical period in which legal system arose from rudimentary beginnings and then developed to the point at which its constitutive features had acquired an identifiable shape. See: Hallaq, Wael. An Introduction To Sunni Usul al Fiqh. Cambridge University Press, (1997). 39Weiss, Bernard C. The Formation of Islamic Law. In The Spirit of Islamic Law. The University of Georgia Press, 1988. p.8.

16  

16  

During the ninth and tenth centuries “certain specialists in Hadith busied themselves

with the gathering of Hadith narratives into written compilations. Which resulted in the

emergence of the classical Hadith books, which contained only Hadith narratives

judged to be authentic by the compilers, along with the Isnads upon which that

judgment was based.” 40

Whereas the Quranic text was of relatively modest size and the amount of strictly legal

provisions in the Quran was in any case meager, however important for certain areas

of the law such as family and inheritance law, the body of hadith texts was enormous,

and a much greater part of the law would be anchored in Hadith than in the Quran. 41

3.1 Women in Islamic Law

When mentioning legal matters that concern women, it is not a surprise to

know that laws regarding women were mainly about women in marriage and divorce.

Patriarchal structures of societies organized women to become wives. Unsurprisingly,

what a woman would need from the law is her right and obligation in the marriage

institute. It starts from the Quran that indicates that her wifely role is her primary one,

even though she may be involved in other tasks. The emphasis in the Quran is

reflected in legal texts, where most of the material devoted to regulating women’s lives

are mainly on marriage and divorce from one side, and on ritual, purity, prayer or

punishment. The rest is addressed generally to men.

The structure makes the woman under the guardianship of the man. First as a child,

and until marriage to a husband.

The majority of the verses in the Quran about women’s lives depict

a woman who is a member of a patriarchal household. She is at all

times under the care and control of a male guardian. When she is

a minor, he manages any assets she has. If she is fortunate, he                                                                                                                          40  Ibid.p13.  41  Ibid.  pp.  14-­‐15.  

17  

17  

manages her assets responsibly, and he turns them over to her

once she has reached the physical mental maturity. Whether she

is a minor or an adult, he is in charge of concluding a marriage

contract on her behalf. When she passes into the care of her

husband. She owes her husband absolute obedience. However,

women have the rights as well as men, and are urged to treat the

women in their care well42.

In short, a Muslim woman is a member of a patriarchal household who is both cared

for and controlled by a male guardian, ideally her father, until she reaches her puberty

and then her husband. No matter what the mathhab is, there is a consensus of

guardianship on women. In marriage, a woman cannot marry without her guardian.

Even though mathaheb could have different views, such as Abu Hanifa. There are

places where a woman can be a guardian, but this is limited to marrying her slaves.

In divorce, the chapters in fiqh texts devoted to divorce include a myriad of details and

discussions vastly more than those on marriage. Regardless to the dispute among the

different mathaheb on the issue, it is worth noting that, it addresses men not women. It

is about a man right to utter the words for divorce. And what are the women’s rights

and obligations after being divorced. The base is that a man decides the divorce. The

exception is what is called khul’.43

4. Al-Ghazālī

Abu Hamid Muhammad Ibn Muhammad al-Ghazālī al-Tusi was born in 1058

A.D in Tus, present-day Iran (d.1111). Al-Ghazālī is viewed as one of the leading

scholars of Sunni and Sufi traditions and is credited with preserving the Ash’ari

teachings in Islamic theology as an unchallenged principle of the Muslim social order

in general and has continued to remain so until this day. “In his religious experience

                                                                                                                         42 Spektorsky, A. Susan, Women in classical Islamic law. Brill (2010), Ch. 1, Women in Quran, Ch.1. p.59.

43  Ibid.  Ch.3,  p.124.  

18  

18  

first as an orthodox theologian then as a mystic, author and traveller, al-Ghazālī’

came to embody all that Islam itself experienced in its multiple spiritual phases,

ranging from the formal doctrinal to the experiential and mystical.”44

Al-Ghazālī’ spent much of his life under the Seljuk administration, in particular Nizam

al-Mulk.45He headed al-Nizamiyya Madrasa in Baghdad in (1091) and was given

many titles by Nizam al-Mulk: Brightness of Religion (Zayn al-Din) and Distinction

among Religious Authorities and Proof of Islam (Hujjat al-Islam).

4.1 Al-Ghazālī’ ’s life \work and influence

Al-Ghazālī contributed to what is perceived as undying books in the

history of Islam that included works on Jurisprudence, Theology, Philosophy and

Logic. He submitted himself genuinely to Sufism in his later life, amid which time he

delivered a series of works on Sufism and ethics. It is worth noting that he was not

accepted into the Sufi orders during his early life.

Al- Ghazālī’s contention in support of religion was so strong, that he was blamed for

harming the reason for logic in which resulted in Ibn Rushd (Averroes) composition of

Tahafut al- Tahafut as a response to his Tahafut al -Falasifa.

Al-Ghazālī’s approach in his writings and his message changed by the time.

Sometimes with structure and other times with addressing different audience. “In all

cases al-Ghazālī’ was an elite religious scholar who commanded a certain authority

on the basis of his learning, as a representative of the revealed law, and as a master

of he social and professional conventions of elite scholars…. Al-Ghazālī’ cultivated a

different form of religious authority, namely that of a pious ascetic, disdainful of the

                                                                                                                         44 Al-Ghazali, Abu Hamid. "On Breaking the Two Desires. Book 3 : The Ways to Perish." In The Revival of Religious Sciences, translated by Caesar Faraha. Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, (1992). Introduction. http://www.ghazali.org.

45 Garden, Kenneth. The First Islamic Reviver. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014, pp.18-22. Al-Ghazālī became the student of the famous Muslim scholar Abu'l Ma'ali Juwayni, at the age of 23. After the death of Al-Juwayni in 1085. Al-Ghazālī was invited to go to the court of Nizamul Mulk. In 1091 Nizam al-Mulk appointed him as chief professor in the Nizamiyya of Baghdad. He had more than 300 students.

19  

19  

approval of political authorities, and fearless in commanding right and forbidding

wrong, even when speaking to powerful men.”46

4.2 Women in al-Ghazālī’s Work

There exists a plenty of disputable proclamations made by al-

Ghazālī with respect to women, ranging from his portrayal of marriage as servitude

for women to his endorsing of the directive to beat defiant wives and his rundown of

intrinsic female imperfections arranged from Islamic tradition stopping with his blunt

belief that education doesn’t suit women’s minds and ending with his insisting on the

belief that women nature is a mixture of that’s of the devil. In what is represented as

al- Ghazālī’s style, al-Ghazālī’ used the Quran and the Ḥadīth as his sources in the

majority of his work; he appeared to be repeating and complimenting the Quran and

the recorded expressions and activities of Prophet Muhammad.47

There is a difference between Mizan al-ʿAmal, and Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn when it comes

to mentioning women as well. In Mizan al-ʿAmal, which he wrote before his journey of

isolation, women are mentioned in particular and positive terms.

Mizan al-ʿAmal is written in a language full of advice and guidance from someone

who is trying to harmonize the relationship of a person with his behavior in a genuine

attempt to reach a pious relationship with God that helps the society to become a

better place. The patriarchal language is not sensed. When he speaks about

education for example, he is delivering his message to everyone, even though he

never mentions women specifically, but he never also makes exclusivity for

education to men. The same applies to other advices he provides on virtue, wisdom

and love. In a section on desires the language is totally different than the one written                                                                                                                          46  Garden,  Kenneth.  The  First  Islamic  Reviver.  P.127.  47 C. Farah, a translator of the Ihya’ highlights in his preface that: “It is important to note while working on al Ghazālī’ texts, that there is no precise citation of hadith sources where scholars of Islamic tradition are in agreement. Al-Ghazālī’, however, relies often on much less verified hadith, some of which have been relayed on weak or relatively unreliable authority. It seems that he was more interested in the didactic message, used often in the Ihya' to support a contention, than in what purists of later years might perceive as precision. Apparently he was willing to risk the judgment of posterity and criticism for incorporating traditions that could not be verified.” See: Al-Ghazali, Abu Hamid. "On Breaking the Two Desires. Book 3 : The Ways to Perish." In The Revival of Religious Sciences, translated by Caesar Faraha. Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, (1992).

20  

20  

in “Ihya”, as he never mentions women in accusatory position. His message is a

general message for both men and women.

“Mizan al A’mal serves as a short work on ethics”, in comparison to the Ihya’. “It

begins with a passionate call for the pursuit of felicity in the afterlife, a goal pursued

through the acquisition of knowledge and ethical practice”.48

In this work he mentions women a few times in the chapter (declaration) about

Explaining the Sorts of Goods and Felicities. He says in describing a virtuos woman

that she “is the plough of the man and the protection (shield) of his religion. The

prophet said: the best help in religion is a good (virtuous) woman”.49 He then makes

recommendation of not favoring outer beauty over inner beauty. The rest of his

mentioning of women seems balanced. For instance in the chapter on desire, he

discusses desires that include food and sex. His mentioning women are about

restrictions of sexual positions in order to keep production. The other mentioning is in

making a list of women’s given roles that include her beauty, maintaining household

and virtue. He recommends marriage to virtuous women who keep their religion in

good practice. Mentioning women is not particularly positive, but it is by no means

aggressive or offensive in the next parts of the book.

Also, in Kimya- sa’âda, when he deals with women, he gives guidance to treatment

regarding the issue of disobedience that is directly affiliated with the Quranic

guidance in Sura 4:34 50 in which he contributes to some directions such as how

many days a man should abandon the woman and how to strike her and on which

part of her body.51

                                                                                                                         48  Garden.  P.40.  49 Al- Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. Mizan al-'Amal ( The Scale Of Action). Edited by : Suleiman Dunia (1st ed), Dar al Ma’aref . Egypt (1964) P.297. www.Ghazālī.org.

50 “Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.” Holy Quran.

51  Al-­‐Ghazālī’,  (Transl.  Claude  Field)  The  Alchemy  of  Happiness.  Cosimo,  NY,  (2005),  p.  70.  

21  

21  

Such intervention didn’t arouse controversy because he was giving guidance on an

already mentioned matter in quite clear details on the matter.

In Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn and Naṣiḥat al-Muluk, al-Ghazālī changes his views regarding

women tremendously. His statements range from giving guidelines on marriage and

behavior that describe marriage as a form of slavery for women, to authoritative

statements on obedience. He says: “ Marriage is a form of enslavement; thus she is

his slave, and she should obey the husband absolutely in everything he demands of

her provided such demands do not constitute an act of disobedience.”52

The personal life of al-Ghazālī as we know is limited only to few accounts of his

family in some of his work, as in Al Muqhidh min al-Dhalal. Looking at it from this

angle, while trying to determine his changes in the view on women, one will conclude

that the journey he took influenced the alterations. He had a normal life before he

embarked on his journey. His prejudice against women starts during or after his

journey, and it is during and after this period that he wrote the Ihya and Naṣiḥat al

Muluk.

Scholars today are in contempt with the idea that al-Ghazālī was not just a wandering

scholar seeking the final contemplation with God. He was a keen thinker whose

career was closely attached to the court of the Sultan and he had an agenda

regarding the Muslim world that was taking shape. Gardens argue that,

As the author of the Revival, al- Ghazālī is the Islamic tradition’s first self-proclaimed reviver, boldly declaring the death of the religious sciences he practiced and proposing his own agenda for restoring them to life by re-centering them on the Science of the Hereafter, a discipline of his own invention. As the proponent of that agenda, he audaciously declared himself to be the divinely appointed Renewer of his century.53

As much as the following point may still need further research, it could be difficult to

investigate, given the very little information available. The dispute that erupted

between al-Ghazālī and Turkan Khatun the wife of Malikshah after his death could be

                                                                                                                         52  Al-­‐Ghazālī’.  (Trans  M.  Farah)  Ihya’  Ulum  al-­‐din  Etiquette  of  Marriage.  Utah  Press,  (1984),  p.  120.  53  Garden,  Kenneth.  First  Islamic  Reviver.  P.169.  

22  

22  

related to his change of position and decision to leave the Nizamiyya School and his

career in the court of the sultan. We know that he was under immense pressure in

the sequence of the murders of the different Sultans and Nizam al-Mulk, but how

Turkan Khatun was closely related to this is unknown. What is known is that al-

Ghazālī refused to take her side in giving a Fatwa that enables her son to become

the Sultan. However, the impact of this incident could have on al-Ghazālī’s views on

women in Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn and in Naṣiḥat al-Muluk remains unknown.

In Naṣiḥat al-Muluk, he deliberately takes an attacking position on women, and unlike

Mizan al-ʿAmal; he makes parables of women with cases that are not necessarily

related to women. He deliberately compares women to the devil, and he continues to

warn the kings against the evil of women. It is also important to note that, Naṣiḥat al-

Muluk was written in Persian, and some parts are not guaranteed to be attributed to

al-Ghazālī himself. A further explanation about the relationship with women will be

explained in further elaboration in the section on Naṣiḥat al-Muluk.

Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn (The Revival of Religious Sciences)

Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn is divided into four parts, each containing ten chapters.54 The aim of

Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, as Garden describes it:

His aim is not simply to present a guide for interested readers, but to transform the landscape of the Islamic religious tradition, restricting law and theology to their proper and limited role in regulating worldly affairs, while elevating the science of seeking felicity in the hereafter to the central concern of the Islamic scholarly tradition.” This meant that al-Ghazālī’ by doing this “has used every source of religious authority and rhetorical tool at his disposal to weave an all-encompassing vision of Islam in all its facets bent towards the goal of attaining felicity in the hereafter.55

In the Introduction of C. Farah’s Translation to Etiquette of Marriage and Curbing the                                                                                                                          54  1)   Acts   of  worship   (Rubʿ   al-­‐ʿibadāt)  deals  with   knowledge   and   the   requirements   of   faith—ritual   purity,  prayer,   charity,   fasting,   pilgrimage,   recitation   of   the   Qurʾān,   and   so   forth;   2)   Norms   of   Daily   Life   (Rubʿ   al-­‐ʿadat)   concentrates   on   people   and   society—   manners   related   to   eating,   marriage,   earning   a   living,   and  friendship;  describes  the  role  of  a  woman  in  the  society.  3)  The  Ways  to  Perdition  (Rubʿ  al-­‐muhlikat)  and  4)  The  Way  to  Salvation  (Rubʿ  al-­‐munajiyat)  is  dedicated  to  the  inner  life  of  the  soul  and  discusses  first  the  vices  that   people   must   overcome   in   themselves   and   then   the   virtues   that   they   must   strive   to   achieve.  www.ghazali.org    55  Garden,  First  Islamic  Reviver,  p.103.  

23  

23  

two Appetites, the second part of which deals with carnal lust, Farah compliments al-

Ghazali’s courage to discuss openly such a delicate subject without inhibition. His

approach to it, and to other sensitive topics according to C. Farah “are not anchored

in society's mercurial and wavering values but in the firmer and more permanent

standards established by religious ethics, particularly those enshrined in the Quran

and the fundamental law of Islam, the Shari’ah.”56

These are also the same topics that al-Ghazālī’ dealt with in the eleventh century.

None treated directly the question of human sexuality outside the context of religious

injunctions according to Farah.57 Al Ghazālī’ finds in the desire to food an introduction

to all evils. But at the same time abstaining is the closest to become a prophet.58

The second part of the Curbing is about the lust of the genitals. While he dedicates

less than half of this book to the desire of food, he dedicates more than half of this

book to the lust of the genitals. What is obvious in al-Ghazali’s language when

describing lust of a man and that of a woman, whereas, it seems a normal desire, as

food, that a man needs to suppress himself from. However, he warns: "women are

the snares of the devil. Were it not for this lust, women would have no power over

men”. 59

He describes lust in women as if it is an innate quality. Woman is frequently

associated with Iblis.60

He continues to illustrate with examples of women following men and seducing them

and men resisting. For a man to control and curb his lust, al-Ghazālī’s advice is

                                                                                                                         56  Al-­‐Ghazali,   "On   Breaking   the   Two   Desires.   Book   3   :   The   Ways   to   Perish."   In   The   Revival   of   Religious  Sciences,  translated  by  Caesar  Farah,  (1992).  57 In the Curbing of the two appetites, Al-Ghazali states in the introducing paragraphs: “Know ye that the greatest pain afflicting man is the lust of the stomach. It is on account of it that Adam (pbuh) and Eve were ejected from the abode of tranquility (the garden of Eden) to the abode of humiliation and impoverishment (this world). The fruit of the tree (apple) had been proscribed to them but they allowed their covetousness to overwhelm them, so they ate of it and the evil thereof became clear to them.” See: Curbing appetites p. 31 translation of C Farah, p.1 Arabic). It seems interesting that he lays responsibility here on both Adam and Eve not Eve alone. 58 Ibid.

59 Al-Ghazali. On Breaking the Two Desires, p.12 Arabic.

60 Ibid.

24  

24  

marriage. In this sense a woman becomes a product in which the man chooses, and

his advice for a perfect wife is a poor religious virtuous woman who “must be inferior

to man in four things, otherwise she would despise him: age, height, possessions,

and status. But she should be superior to him in four: beauty, upbringing, religiosity,

and good manners.” 61

On Adab al-Nikah, there is an obvious moderation at the beginning, or attempt of a

moderate attitude towards women in his discourse. First he does make a connection

between male and female perspectives of sexual needs and its results in the union in

the making and continuation of human kind. Surprisingly, he gives credit to females

in the process of the making of humanity in many instances. In the advantages of

marriage he affirms that is a good way for man’s sexual desire, which is important for

making women produce children. One common theme that we can notice from the

chapter on marriage is his focus on the needs of men, rather than men and women.

Women are simply the objects of desire for men.62

He also compares a woman to a donkey; in the way a male should control her

desires. 63

In the following chapters, he focuses on the qualities that a man should seek in a

wife. However, one cannot help but notice how he was a firm believer that men were

the holders of virtue and who were in charge of correcting and supervising women’s

behavior and virtue.64

As for the husband’s obligations in marriage he says: “ he is obligated to observe

moderation and good manners in twelve matters: feasting, cohabitation, dally­ing,

exercising authority, jealousy, support, teaching, appor­tionment, politeness at times

of discord, intimate relations, producing children, and separation through divorce.”65

                                                                                                                         61 Ibid. p.14. Arabic. 62 Al-Ghazali. Etiquette of Marriage, p.3 (Arabic), p.8. (English). 73 He says: Ibn Salim said when asked about marriage: ‘It [marriage] is more desirable in this time of ours for someone who is overcome by lust: like the male donkey who sees a female donkey and can neither be dissuaded from her by beating nor can he control himself; should he control himself, it is preferable to leave him alone’.” Ibid. pp. 25-26.

64  Ibid.  pp.  37-­‐38.  65 Ibid.

25  

25  

It seems as if it is out of nature according to al-Ghazālī’, that women are normally ill

mannered, and it is men who seem to take the burden of patience and tolerance.

However, he also relates to examples such as: The Prophet of God said, “The most

perfect of believers in faith are those who are the finest in manners and most gentle

toward their wives.” “He said, “The best among you are the most charitable toward

their wives, and I am the best among you toward my wives.66

Al-Ghazālī’ retreats back to the norm in the fourth assertion and he gives many

examples such as:

It is a man's right to be followed, not to be a follower. God has appointed men as trustees over women, and has called the husband “mas­ter”; and the Lord has said, “and they met her lord and master at the door” [Qur’an 12:25]. For if the master is transformed into a slave, then he has exchanged God's grace for thanklessness.67

The rest of the book is a full guideline about behaviors that mounts in principle onto

women’s obligations towards discipline. Directions of how to teach a woman about

menstruation and how a man performs sex and ejaculate. What he calls equality

among wives and how to manage disputes. How to have children, how to be pure,

how to maintain beauty after birth, in all and every sense the male is superior to the

female.68

Also, to make it clearer and closer to the heart of the reader he says: The Messenger

of God was asked, “What rights can a woman claim from a man?” He replied, “to

feed her when he eats, to clothe her when he is clothed, [but] not to be insolent or

beat her excessively. He is to avoid her only in cohabitation.” 69

On divorce, a chapter is dedicated to the supremacy of man and inferiority of women

in this sense.70

                                                                                                                         66  Ibid.  p.45.  67  Ibid.  p.45  68 Ibid. p. 51.

69  Ibid.  P.54.  70 Ibid.

26  

26  

Al-Ghazālī stresses on how wives ought to impart to spouses loads of life, how

faithful she ought to be and how she should be regarding him. He describes the role

of a woman in Adab an Nikah by stating series of orders that start by ordering her

stay at home and tend to her spinning; going in and out only in emergencies and not

excessively; visiting neighbors shouldn’t be frequent and only when situation requires

it; all what she can do is to look after the house and tend all the requirements of the

husband. When he gives recommendation on personal hygiene, this also is for the

benefit of the husband and his pleasure. The only other thing she should be doing is

practicing rituals. 71 Al-Ghazālī then cautions all men to be watchful of women

because their cunning is monstrous, and their insidiousness is poisonous; they are

corrupt and ill spirited. He confirms this by saying: “It is a truth that all the trials,

hardships and burdens which come upon men originate from women”.72

However, towards the last page he switches to a crumbling position of women and

prevalence over man to her through listing ten rights that women do not have which

include: Men to be sensible, thinking enough to be sympathetic on women, and that

men ought to take it easy on women on the grounds that they are of lesser mind, for

women are men's detainees, and one ought to never take their recommendation, or

consideration to what they say, and the individuals who rely on their feeling die.

What's more, he says an alternate story in which the result is that listening to a

woman exhortation is constantly off base.

If up until this moment it was about dominance of man in merits, manhood and

qualities, that point toward direct submission and subordination from the woman’s

side, al-Ghazālī offers the last chapter on what he calls ‘man’s rights’ with a starting

paragraph that says in the Arabic version:

“The conclusion (essence) is that marriage is a type of slavery (Riqq), she is a slave

for him so she has the obligation to be obedient to him completely in all what he asks

her from herself in what doesn’t have disobedience (he means to God).”73

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   71  Al-­‐Ghazālī’.  (Trans  Farah  Adab  a  Nikah,  Etiquette  of  Marriage.  p  124.    72  Ibid.  73  Ibid.  

27  

27  

He recites many examples of ḥadīth in this regard, in which superiority of a husband

is recalled. He makes a man position closest to God’s position in worshipping. It is

important to note here that this whole paragraph was totally omitted from the English

translation by Farah (from the Ghazālī’ website version).

Consequently, thinking of al-Ghazālī’s views on women, we do know now that al-

Ghazālī saw women as subordinates in their roles in the household as wives,

whereas, he considered a woman’s role strictly in obedience. We also know that

women have no place in the workforce or leadership, except for weaving and

spinning.

Naṣiḥat al-Muluk (Counsels to the Kings)

The work Naṣiḥat al-Muluk is considered among the last of Al-Ghazālī’s works.

However, the date of the book is debated. It dates from sometime between 1105 and

1111. “Modern scholars customarily characterizes the work as paradigmatic of the

genre of mirrors for princes, consisting of moral advice and litany of do’s and don’ts

for the prince.” 74

Al-Ghazālī dedicated the final chapter “On Women and their good and Bad Points”.

Al-Ghazālī admits that the increasing of the world relies on women, because women

give birth. But it is men’s men's obligation to take safeguards in matters of picking

wives and giving girls in marriage. Al-Ghazālī uses women as parable to the king on

moral and behavioral issues such as losing temper, the danger of temptation of

women.

In the opening chapter he warns from women and the evil caused by them. He also

makes parables of negative traits that if the kings follow, they will be behaving like

women.75

In the fourth part of chapter one he speaks about arrogance and he mentions stories

                                                                                                                         74 Yavari, Neguin. "Polysemous Texts and Reductionist Readings:Women and Heresy in thr Siyar al-Muluk." In Views from the Edge:Essays in Honor of Richard W.Bulliet, NY: Columbia University Press,( 2004), p.324.

75 Ibid. p.158.

28  

28  

and warns about certain bad habits and at some point he warns by saying: “ beware

of women, because if I ever set up a trap to people, I rely on women.” 76

In the rest of the chapter he mentions life and making comparison to women, once a

prostitute woman, and another time as an old ugly woman. In both cases he

describes women as tricky cheating characters.

After mentioning Hadiths that emphasize on the evil side of women, he starts his own

explanations stressing that one should look for a wife who has ‘good religion’. In the

following pages, he mentions good qualities in women in the household, and relates

stories that show wisdom in women with good decisions with the husbands. He also

mentions stories of good women whose wisdom sorted them out of bad situations

and taught men great lessons. He emphasizes how wives should share with their

husbands the burdens of life, how obedient she should be and showing respect

towards him.

On a more controversial level he goes on putting women in types and he describes

them as follows: “ The race of women consists of ten species, and the character of

each (of these) corresponds and is related to the distinctive quality of one of the

animals. One resembles the pig, another the ape, another the sheep.”77 He describes

each one here in negative tracks and then continues in his description of women as a

scorpion, a mouse, a fox, a mule, a dog. For him the best woman is the one who is “

blessed like the sheep, in which everything is useful. She is useful to her husband

and to his family and the neighbors, compassionate with her own kinsfolk,

affectionate towards the household and towards her children, and obedient to

Almighty God.”78

Naṣiḥat al-Muluk, as stated before is debated on more than one level. The first in

which discussed whether it was written before his isolation period or after. The

                                                                                                                         76 Ibid. p.13.

77  Ibid.  (Trans)  pp.165-­‐166.  78  Ibid.  

29  

29  

second is about whether all of the parts of the book are his or not especially that it

was written in Persian.79

Between these two questions, an important point of reference should be discussed.

The relationship between al- Ghazālī and Nizam al-Mulk was very strong and it is not

a surprise that the days of fame and prosperity dwelled upon al-Ghazālī after the

assassination of Nizam al-Mulk. This takes us to the earlier discussion of how much

al-Ghazālī was involved in the political aspects of the court of the Seljuk sultans and

how much he was not just a mere man of Religion who sought the greater meaning

of creation.”80 He supports his story with many anecdotes.

An article by Yavari 81 provides an important answer to my question regarding al-

Ghazālī’s reason for the attack on women. The article reveals this side of dispute

between Nizam al-Mulk and Turkan Khatun that could have led to the mysterious

death of her husband Malik Shah and assassination of Nizam al Mulk. Turkan

Khatun insisted that her son be the future Sultan. The dispute and chaos upon the

death of the two figures was not resolved until 1105. Nizam al Mulk has also a

famous piece of writing Siyar al-Muluk82 which al–Ghazālī mentions in Naṣiḥat al

Muluk.

Nizam al-Mulk mentions in Siyar al-Muluk an example from Aristotle’s advice to

Alexander the great warning him of a poisonous woman, in which Aristotle claims

that saved the king from both chance and his own weak will. Nizam al-Mulk uses in

his book examples from the life of the Prophet to illustrate the disturbing effect of

women in political areas.

                                                                                                                         79  Patricia  Crone  has  questioned  the  authorship  of  the  work,  and  raised  the  issue  of  inadequacy  of  anecdotes.  The  work  has  tow  major  issues  not  just  in  the  content  but  also  narrative  form  and  structure.  The  second  part  is  more  sober  than  the  first  part.  She  claims:  “  First  the  stylistic  contrast  is  glaring.  While  the  first  part  of  the  Naṣiḥat   al-­‐Muluk   is   a   well-­‐organized   treatise,   the   second   part   is   a   rambling   compilation   of   anecdotes,   5  aphorisms  and  poetry  loosely  stung  together  in  no  particular  order  and  adding  up  to  no  particular  point.  See:  Yavari,  pp.  324-­‐325.  80Ibid.  (Trans)  pp.165-­‐166.  81  Yavari,  Neguin.  Polysemous  Texts  and  Reductionist  Readings:  Women  and  Heresy  in  the  Siyar  al-­‐Muluk.  82  An   exposition   of   Nizam   al-­‐Mulk’s   thoughts   on   different   pressing   political   and   religious   concerns   of   his  times.  It  was  conceived  in  1086.  The  first  part  was  prepared  after  1088  and  the  second  part  probably  around  1091.  Siyar  al-­‐Muluk  appears  to  be  no  more  than  a  series  of  anecdotes  repeated  in  almost  all  other  mirrors  of  the  medieval  Islamic  period,  and  hence  of  little  important  for  deciphering  historical  information.  Oblivious  to  accurate  chronology,  repetitious,  and  faulty  in  its  factual  contents.  The  Siyar  ties  together  string  of  anecdotes  of   pre-­‐Islamic  kings,  Aristotelian   tidbits,   stories   about  prophet  Mohammad,   and  episodes   from   the   lives  of  earlier  caliphs.  See:  Yavari,  p.  323.    

30  

30  

Al- Ghazālī presents women in Naṣiḥat al-Muluk as a major obstacle to proper

leadership. He considered women to be “compromised in both religion and wits, and

at the mercy of men by divine injection, however; evil, treacherous and seductive”.83

He also relates to an advice to keep women illiterate, “for teaching them to read and

write will have an undesirable impact on their character.” 84

However, he finds her some virtue in doing some work basing his statement on a

Hadith of the prophet by saying:

Whenever a woman who fulfills God’s requirements and is obedient to her husband, takes hold of a spinning-wheel and turns it; this is as if she were reciting God’s epithets, joining congregational prayer, and fighting against infidels.’ For al- Ghazālī “as long as (a woman) spins at the wheel, sins vanish from her. Spinning at the wheel is women’s bridge and stronghold. Three things sounds reach to the throne of God on High: 1) the sound of bows being drawn by warriors fighting infidels; 2) the sound of the pens of scholars; 3) the sound of spinning by virtuous women.85

Scholars such as Denise Spellberg contemplated whether Nizam al-Mulk was a

misogynist and this resulted in his dispute with Turkan Khatun. He argues: “ Nizam

al-Mulk’s chapter on women may be read as succinct treatise on female inferiority.

The Vizier’s pronouncements were not novel in Islamic context…Finally the vizier’s

anxiety about the influence of women is liked to his own immediate political

confrontation with Turkan Khatun”.86 Al-Ghazālī obediently follows the track of Nizam

al-Mulk’s Siyar al-Muluk regarding women, which brings more understanding to al-

Ghazālī’s own views on women.87

4.3 Sufism effect on al-Ghazālī

We have seen that al-Ghazālī was deeply influenced by Nizam al-Mulk, in which

affected his views on women. This takes us to the other place that influenced al-

Ghazālī’s views on women which is Sufism.

                                                                                                                         83  Al-­‐Ghazālī.  Counsels  for  Kings,  (trans.)  pp.158-­‐173.  84  Ibid.  pp.  158-­‐73  85    Ibid.  P.162.  86  Spellberg  Denise,  “Nizam  al  Mulk’s  Manipulation  off  Tradition:  Aisha  and  the  Role  of  Women  in  the  Islamic  Government,”  The  Muslim  World,  78:2(1988)  pp.111-­‐17  See:  Yavari.    87  Yavari.  P.236.  

31  

31  

Devoted mystics focus on religious austerity and separation from their general

surroundings, and the impression of women as a power for diversion legislated their

state of mind towards them.88 The predominant perspective among them was that

marriage obstructs the procedure of focusing on God.

When evaluating al-Ghazālī’s work, we can see that his ultimate aspiration was to

reach the realms of Sufism, which is clearly stated in many of his works that has

been mentioned previously. However for the purpose of this research, my focus was

only on some of his work, e.g. Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn’, particularly the part that serves as a

guideline to practicing Sufis. In addition, his al-Munqidh min al-dhalal, he makes it

clear to his readers that he found the right path to understanding God through

Sufism. This observation brings forward a potentially more profound reason why al-

Ghazālī changed his position on women in his writings between the Mizan al-‘Amal,

and Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn.

As mentioned earlier, al-Ghazālī wasn’t just a modest thinker and an observant

philosopher with no specific agenda. Gardens argue that al-Ghazālī was denied entry

to becoming a Sufi. Moreover, he spent the rest of his life becoming one. So his

critical views on women could be an outcome to his designated guideline/manual to

Sufism.

Farah argues in the Introduction of the Curbing that:

Prior to the rise of the Sufi orders after the twelfth century, devoted mystics stressed asceticism and detachment from the world around them. Their perception of women as a force for distraction governed their attitude towards them. They did not regard them as inferior when they insisted on a life apart but rather that they should be less visible to avoid temptation, particularly for those who were commencing the arduous task of denial, abject humility and withdrawal. If the extremists among them as agents of temptation perceive women, this is not to attribute malicious intent to them, but rather to highlight the inherent weakness in those males who might not have been qualified, or were even ready, for the spiritual journey to God. Those who are not familiar with Sufi literature on love, excessive love, and the position of women in

                                                                                                                         88  An   Aftab.Macksood,   Historicizing   Al-­‐Ghazālī   and   His   Influence.   Masters   Thesis   in   History   of   Science.  Extension  School,  Harvard  University.  

32  

32  

Sufi undertakings are understandably misled by their symbolisms and similes.89

For Sufi Muslims, forbearance is an important practice that would prompt union with

God and women are a source of a distracting energy from their aspired devout

journey towards the divine. Marriage is an option, just if all else fails, especially for

those whose sexual urges are so strong and not easy to control. An explanation that

may justify al-Ghazali’s guidelines in Marriage in Adab al-Nikah. The Sufi

discernment had a tendency to disaffirm the Muslim conviction that marriage was

important for the spread of life. 90

4.4 Plato and Aristot le’s inf luence on al-Ghazālī

There is no doubt that Aristotle influenced al-Ghazālī’s views on

women especially in structure. They both perceived men as superior by natures.

Also, both agree that it is not just about inferior vs. superior natures. But women are

by nature evil.

Both Aristotle and al-Ghazālī decided that a woman’s best role in society is to raise

children and that women are best suited for household activities. However, whereas

Aristotle gave the women more credit in this sense, al-Ghazālī did not. Consequently

al-Ghazālī treated women as a subordinate to men. His clear statement on marriage

as “slavery (Riqq)” explains a lot about his perception. Aristotle in this sense was

generous. He gave women credit for their role within the family. He explained that a

good family is the outcome of a good wife. Al-Ghazālī only saw one master and an

obedient wife.

Whereas al-Ghazālī’s general perfect Islamic state encompasses Platonic views in

moralities and structure, he never considers Plato’s views on the nature of women

and the roles Plato gives the woman in the Republic. Al-Ghazālī has a clear

perception on the futility of education and knowledge when it comes to women. As a

result, the role of women outside the home is not a relevant issue.

                                                                                                                         89  Al-­‐Ghazali.  Abstinence  in  Islam.  Kasr  Al  Shahwataiyn.  (Trans.  C.  Farah)  (1992)  P.22.  90  Ibid.  Preface.  p.1.  

33  

33  

Al-Ghazālī ’s women serve the desires and needs of men. Al-Ghazālī ’s perception of

women and their roles as wives are very likely connected to the Sufi teachings that

renounce desire.

34  

34  

5. Ibn Rushd (Averroes)

5.1 Ibn Rushd’s work and Influences

Abu al-Walid Muhammad Ibn-Rushd, also known as Averroes in the

West, was born in 1126 A.D (died in 1198) in Cordova.

His ideas influenced the transformation of thought in medieval Europe. He is

considered the last of the great Muslim thinkers who integrated Islamic

traditions and Greek thought. His beliefs and writings were to have an effect on

the minds of many intellectuals in the Middle Ages who lived beyond the

borders of al-Andalus. 91 He critically used the classical commentators

Themistius and Alexander of Aphrodisias and philosophers such as al-Farabi,

Ibn-Sinna, and Ibn-Bajjah.

Although Ibn Rushd’s early work dealt with medicine, legal and theological

writings, much of his focus was on philosophy. Undoubtedly his most important

writings in this area combine religious-philosophical polemical treatises,

composed in the years 1179 and 1180: Fasl al- Maqâl fima bayna al-Hikma wa

al-Sharia min al-Ittisal 92; and Tahafut at-tahafut in defense of philosophy and a

direct response to al- Ghazālī’s Tahafut al Falasifa.

One cannot but notice Ibn Rushd’s eagerness in his writings to start from the

perspective of the soundness of Sharia, but at the same time showing how

misleading interpretations can be. He also asks the student of philosophy for

the same consideration normally accorded by the student of Islamic

jurisprudence. According to Ibn Rushd “both need time and assistance to arrive

at a comprehension of their art. And as long as there is such a harmony

between philosophy and religion, there should be no tension between

                                                                                                                         91  Habeeb   Salloum,   Averroes-­‐   The   Great   Muslim   Philosopher   who   planted   the   seeds   of   the   European  renaissance.  1998.  Http//www.arabworldbooks.com/articles19.html.  92  Known  in  English  as  Decisive  Treatise  and  Determination  of  the  Relationship  between  the  Divine  Law  and  Philosophy,  with  its  Appendix:  al-­‐Manahij  al–adilla.  

35  

35  

practitioners of either”.93 “To establish the true, inner meaning of religious

beliefs and convictions is the aim of philosophy in its quest for truth. This inner

meaning must not be divulged to the masses, which must accept the plain,

external meaning of Scripture as contained in stories, similes, and

metaphors.”94

His attempt to harmonize between religion and philosophy also led to Ibn

Rushd’s defense of philosophy’s position vis-a-vis his predecessor al-Ghazālī ’s

attack against Ibn-Sinna and al-Farabi, in particular.

In the Commentary on Plato’s Republic, Ibn Rushd emphasizes virtue;

theoretical, deliberative or cognitive, and moral.95 The importance of theoretical

virtue becomes more and more evident until it ultimately becomes obvious that

no one can lay claim to any of the other virtues, unless reason rules in his soul.

In order to have this order of virtues established and the citizens to be raised in

order to develop them, political rules must be in the hands of a philosopher.96

5.2 Plato and Aristotle in Ibn Rushd’s Thought:

Scholars describe Ibn Rushd as a faithful commentator on the works of

Aristotle and Plato. According to Charles Butterworth, Ibn Rushd regarded

Aristotle as embodying the highest development of human intellect, but by no

means a tedious one. He strives to explain the thought of these two Greek

Philosophers while often indicating where he agrees or disagrees with them

and sometimes passing over in silence on important argument, or presenting

an argument as belonging to Plato or Aristotle, but which in fact is not theirs.

“This means above all that the thoughtful reader must be prepared to read the

commentary along with the text commented upon, even though Ibn-Rushd does

                                                                                                                         93 Butterworth, E. Charles. Ethics in Medieval Islamic Philosophy, p.235.

94  E.Rosenthal   .   Averroes.   Encyclopaedia   Britannica.   http:  //www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/45595/Averroes/511/Averroes-­‐defense-­‐of-­‐philosophy.  95 Butterworth, E. Charles. Ethics in Medieval Islamic Philosophy, p.236. 96 Thahabi, Hasan Majeed Obeidi and Kathem, Fatima. Ibn-Rushd Talkhees Assiyasa Li Aflaton (muhawaret al Jumhouriya ), first edition, Beirut: Dar Attaliah, (1998).

36  

36  

not seek to treat either author in a cavalier fashion”.97 E.I. J. Rosenthal also

describes Ibn Rushd in commentaries on Aristotle’s treatises on the natural

sciences, as “someone who showed considerable power of observation.”98

Ibn Rushd’s recognition of Plato’s idea of the transformation and deterioration

of the ideal perfect State into the four imperfect States is of great importance.99

Mu’awiyah I,100 who according to Ibn Rushd perverted the ideal State of the first

four Caliphs101 into a dynastic power State, is viewed by Ibn Rushd in the

Platonic sense as having turned the ideal State into a Timocracy.102 Similarly,

the Almoravid and Almohad states are shown to have deteriorated from a state

that resembled the original perfect Sharia’ state into Timocracy, Oligarchy,

Democracy, and Tyranny.103 The study of The Republic and the Nichomacean

Ethics enabled the Falasifa to see more clearly the political character and

content of the Sharia’ in the context of the classical Muslim theory of the

religious and political unity of Islam.104

                                                                                                                         97 Butterworth, E. Charles. Ethics in Medieval Islamic Philosophy. The Journal of Religious Ethics, n.d. , Cambridge University Press, (2001), p.234.

98Rosenthal  E.I.J.,  Ibn-­‐Rushd,  (1995)  http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ir/art/ir-eb.htm.      99 Leaning heavily on the treatment of Plato’s political philosophy by al- Farabi, Averroes looks at The Republic with the eyes of Aristotle, whose Nicomachean Ethics constitutes for Averroes the first, theoretical part of political science? He is, therefore, only interested in Plato’s theoretical Statements. He explains Plato, whose Laws and Politikos he also knows and uses, with the help, and in the light, of Aristotle’s Analytica posteriora, De anima, Physica, and Nicomachean Ethics. See: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ir/art/ir-eb.htm.

100  Mu’awiyah  I,  Mu’awiyah  ibn  Abi  Sufian,  (born  c.  602,  Mecca,  d.  680,  Damascus).  Founder  of  the  Umayyad  dynasty   of   caliphs.   He   fought   against   the   fourth   caliph,   ʿAlī   (Muhammad’s   son-­‐in-­‐law),   seized   Egypt,   and  assumed   the   caliphate   after   ʿAlī’s   assassination   See:  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/395758/Muawiyah-I.  101  The   first   four  Caliphs:  Abu  Bakr,   'Umar,  Othman  and  Ali.   All   four  were   among   the   earliest   and   closest  Companions  of  the  Prophet.    102 Plato discusses five types of regimes. They are Aristocracy, Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy, and Tyranny.

103  Ibn-­‐Rushd   here   combines   Islamic   notions  with   Platonic   concepts.   In   the   same   vein   he   likens   the   false  philosophers  of  his  time,  and  especially  the  Mutakallimun,  to  Plato’s  sophists.  In  declaring  them  a  real  danger  to   the   purity   of   Islam   and   to   the   security   of   the   State,   he   appeals   to   the   ruling   power   to   forbid   dialectical  theologians  to  explain  their  beliefs  and  convictions  to  the  masses,   thus  confusing  them  and  causing  heresy,  schism,   and   unbelief.   See:   Introduction   by   Thahabi,   Obaid   to   Talkhees   Assiyasa,   commentary   on   Plato’s  Republic,  p.17.    104  http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ir/art/ir-eb.htm.  

37  

37  

Ibn Rushd sees much common ground between the Sharia and Plato’s general

laws (interpreted with the help of Aristotle), notwithstanding his conviction that

the Sharia is superior to the Nomos.105 He accepts al-Farabi’s106 equation of

Plato’s philosopher-king with the Islamic Imam, or leader and lawgiver, but

leaves it open whether the ideal ruler must also be a prophet.

Ibn Rushd completely ignores Aristotle’s negative concepts of women. Although

Ibn Rushd was an Aristotelian, it is unlikely that Aristotle’s negative position on

women.

It may also be, Ibn Rushd, in his efforts to legitimize Aristotle in the minds of his

readers (to “Islamize him”), ignores the latter’s attitudes toward women, finding

it easier to refer to Plato on this subject.107 In so doing, however, he also shows

himself to be more similar to Plato, which made his own findings so unusual for

the Muslim world of his time.

Interestingly, Ibn Rushd’s “own philosophy developed into an intriguing

combination of Aristotelian and Platonic theories. Basically, Ibn Rushd argued

for a sex-polarity orientation for the masses that followed religion, and a sex-

unity orientation for the elite who followed philosophy.”108 109

                                                                                                                         105  Nomos,  (Greek:  “law,”  or  “custom”:)  plural  Nomoi,  in  law,  the  concept  of  law  in  ancient  Greek  philosophy.    106  Al  Farabi  expresses  his  deepest  thought  in  his  commentaries  on  Plato.  “The  philosophy  of  Plato”  presents  Plato’s  philosophy  whereas  the  Summary  presents  his  art  of  kalam.  The  exercise  of  kalam  presupposes  then  the  acceptance  of  the  revelation  of  the  law  by  the  Prophet.   It   is  a  kind  of  kalam  specific  to  the  defenders  of  philosophy   and   not   to   the   defenders   of   religion.   See:  Leo  Strauss’s  Defense  on   the  Philosophic  Life.  Reading  What  is  Political  Philosophy.  Edited  by  Rafael  Major.  University  of  Chicago  Press,  (2013).  107 Prudence, SR. Allen. Plato, Aristotle, and the concept of woman in early Jewish Philosophy, Florilegium, Canada, (1987), pp. 91-92. 108 Ibid. pp. 98-99.

109  In  his  comparison  of  the  status  of  women  in  his  time  to  what  he  aspires  in  the  ideal  state—i.e.,  having  a  status  that  is  not  different  than  that  of  a  man,  he  describes  a  woman  as  a  plant  whose  fruits  only  are  used.  He  rejects   the   idea   that   a  woman   is   only   good   for   sewing   and   giving   birth.   In   fact,   he   actually   asserts   that   a  woman  can  govern,  and  run  a  state,  in  addition  to  conducting  war.  He  went  on  to  give  her  access  to  wisdom  and  anything  that  could  be  related  to  the  achievement  of  justice  in  society.  He  even  went  so  far  as  to  criticize  his  generation’s  view  about  women  as  being  oppressive  and  unjust.    Another  note  is  Ibn  Rushd  access  to  the  text.  It  has  been  debated  that  Ibn  Rushd  might  not  have  worked  on  the  original  text  of  Plato,  but  rather  Galen’s  commentary  on  the  Republic.  As  well  as  the  issue  of  Ibn  Rushd’s  writings  themselves  that  have  been  lost  and  translated  to  Hebrew  long  before  being  accessed  in  Arabic.  The  reason  behind  what  history  called  the  catastrophe  of  Ibn-­‐Rushd,  that  led  to  his  exile  and  burning  of  his  books,  remains  under  speculation.  However  it  is  not  impossible  to  realize  that  his  ideas  caused  anonymous  enemies  to   him.   But   there   is   also   this   direct   doubt   that   it   was   this   specific   book,   the   commentary   that   led   to   his  downfall   from   the   khalifa’s   protection.   In   what   the   commentary   included   to   what   appeared   like   direct  criticism  to  the  current  State.  

38  

38  

In his comparison of the status of women in his time to what he aspires in the

ideal state—i.e., having a status that is not different than that of a man, he

describes woman as a plant whose fruits only are used. He rejects the idea that

a woman is only good for sewing and giving birth. In fact, he actually asserts

that a woman can govern, and run a state, in addition to conducting war. He

went on to give her access to wisdom and anything that could be related to the

achievement of justice in society. He even went so far as to criticize his

generation’s view about women as being oppressive and unjust.

5.3 Women in Ibn Rushd’s Writings and View

By reviewing Bidayat al-Mujtahid, one cannot but notice that Ibn Rushd’s legal

judgments, analyses, and fatwas were in keeping with the views of the jumhur al

Ulama’ (Islamic scholars). However, there is an obvious attitude of moderation in

his fatwas that pertain to women. He would state all the possible different

opinions, but would sometimes put reason in his final words.

However, in the introduction to his Commentary on Plato’s Republic, it seems as if Ibn

Rushd found his way to express his political views, even though he continued to

stress his dis-interest in politics, and his greater interest in philosophy. Plato’s

Republic was Ibn Rushd’s way to agree or complain about issues that existed in the

current Islamic state. If Plato expressed an idea he approved of, he would promote it;

or denounce an idea of which he disapproved. And at some point he would integrate a

topic personally. For example, while, in his previous writings, Ibn Rushd, literally

explained and gave fatwas that concerned strict Islamic guidelines in accordance with

the Quran and regular Ijtihad rules within the Jumhur, in his Commentary on Plato’s

Republic, he finds liberty in exposing non-Islamic views using Plato as a cover for his

own ideas.

Through a brief look into the Bidayat al-Mujtahid and the Commentary, we learn

how often he finds a welcome opportunity to reflect on different matters, such

as household issues, economics, social relations and governance, which he

had already put forward in his Bidayat al-Mujtahid; and he deliberately explains

Plato’s Republic in the same method.

39  

39  

This observation could go well together with Catarina Belo’s remarks on Ibn

Rushd’s Commentary when she states: “Averroes’ (Ibn Rushd’s) most

comprehensive remarks on women are to be found not in an exegetical work on

Aristotle but in his Commentary on Plato’s Republic, and also in his Bidayat al-

Mujtahid. The former is a philosophical commentary and the latter is a manual

of Islamic law.”110

It might be noticed that the first time Ibn Rushd mentions women in the

Commentary111 is on page 94 in the First Treatise, when he has finished with all

the descriptions and in-depth analyses of man’s virtues reaching the perfect state

of soul. Here, he mentions women in a definitely negative way. He says:

Plato said: It is inappropriate for virtuous men to assimilate the deeds of women who shriek while giving birth, and with those women who yearn to have sex with their husbands, or those who are in continuous disputes with their spouses, or those women who are constantly given to weeping and crying, because we want to have people (men) among them who become governors. Those should also not be allowed to converse with servants or slaves, or companion drunken men.112

Here too, however, Ibn Rushd is quoting Plato rather than personally mentioning

women or female behavior negatively. In other words, his elaboration on this judgment

stops with Plato. This might also be Ibn Rushd’s way of dealing with a discussion or

an issue. He may have felt that he had to ease his reader into the argument by stating

what seemed to be a negative description, before actually getting into the subject of

women.

The next time he mentions women, however, (section14, page 96) he connects them

with music. In this case, he connects women and music according to his own

observation and not Plato’s by stating: “Concerning “rhythm”, it is appropriate to

choose that which is selected from women and other people, and use that rhythm to

enhance the courage of the soul. And even if those rhythms are more defined in                                                                                                                          110  Belo,  Catarina.  Some  Considerations  on  Averroes'  Views  Concerning  Women  and  Their  Role   in  Society,  (2002),  pg.2.  111  The   Commentary   refers   to   Ibn-­‐Rushd’s   Commentary   on   Plato’s   Republic,   in   the   Arabic   translation   for  Thahabi.    112  Thahabi,  Hasan  Majeed  Obeidi  and  Kathem,  Fatima.  Ibn-­‐Rushd  Talkhees  Assiyasa  Li  Aflaton  (muhawaret  al  Jumhouriya  ),  p.94.  

40  

40  

Plato’s time, it is however, important that we search for it in our time.”113

The above two paragraphs don’t seem to indicate what Ibn Rushd would be

presenting about women in later chapters. It is significant to realize that his notes

should not be considered positive. If anything, they seem to be almost inadvertent.

On page 123 (Ch.26) of the Commentary, however, Ibn Rushd finally makes the

intervention. Moving from the types of virtues in the city to the status of guardians, and

questioning if guardians should have a community of women and get children from

them, Ibn Rushd deliberately introduces his very own thoughts, saying:

If we want to preserve the quality of those guardians through begetting children that resemble them; that cannot happen if they beget them with any woman. On the contrary, they should only marry those women who are like them in quality, and have been raised in the same surrounding. This does not just apply for guardians but to all people in the state.114

Ibn Rushd continues to take an opportunity to discuss quality of women. Here he

efficiently makes a woman’s quality equivalent with that of a man, albeit; putting it in a

question by asking: “Are women’s own qualities identical with men’s in each category

in the state, particularly as guardians...or are they different?”115 He then offers two

suggestions: “If women share the same quality/nature of men, it means that women

from all classes are equal to men in every rule and command, which doesn’t exclude

us from finding among women warriors, governors, and philosophers.”116 If, however,

they don’t, Ibn Rushd suggests, “Then women’s role in the state should be restricted

to begetting and raising children, because men are not qualified to do that.”117

In this chapter, he goes on to state his own considerations that stem from a comparison between the respective natures of men and women. As to equality, he states that;

They (women) are equal with men in quality and differ only in levels; if this means that man is more efficient than woman in most of his actions, however, it is not impossible that women

                                                                                                                         113  Ibid.  P.96.  114  Ibid.  P.123.  115  Ibid.  116  Ibid.  P.124.  117  Ibid.  

41  

41  

perform some activities with higher efficiency, such as practical music. This is why it is said that melodies are complete if men have composed them and women have performed them.118

Repeating that qualities for both men and women are from the same nature and

type, Ibn Rushd restates the capability of both in leading the state to an

equivalent accomplishment. It is clear that women in such a state can perform

the same work that men do, with some exceptions. For this reason, he adds,

that one should call such actions as the best of actions.

By confirming that women and men can share the same occupation, taking into

consideration that women are weaker in some, they are however, more capable

in certain arts than men such as in sewing, embroidery and others; Ibn Rushd

concludes Plato’s previous statement in his own assertions.

In addition, Ibn Rushd poses the question whether women can perform all three

major roles in society like men, i.e. –following Plato’s tri-partition of society into

these three roles- become artisans, warriors/guardians, and rulers.119

Mohammad Abed al-Jabiri, in his introduction to the Arabic version of the translation of

Ibn Rushd’s Commentary on Plato’s Republic, observed that when Ibn Rushd asked

whether it was an obligation that women participate with men in jobs of securing the

state--being guardians and soldiers with them—or whether it was better to restrict their

mission to bringing children and keeping households, he was expressing his own

thoughts, interfering in the text that he was summarizing, and not just commenting on

it. Al-Jabiri summarizes Ibn Rushd’s position in four points. One is related to what is

basic, wherein there is an assurance in the unity of nature between men and women.

The second goes into what is practical, where he confirms that men and women are

equal in practicing philosophy, leadership and war, even though there are differences

in the way some activities are performed. The third advocates the exclusion of women

by some laws from being a leader. And the fourth is related to the situation of women

in Arab society and in al-Andalus, in particular. Al-Jabiri concludes: “It is true that the

                                                                                                                         118  Ibid.  P.124.    119  Ibid.  p.  7  .  

42  

42  

position of Ibn Rushd revealed itself.” In his opinion, Ibn Rushd independently decided

to discuss and ignore some of Plato’s views on women in his Republic, focusing

instead on the situation of women in his time, caused by poverty and the exclusion of

women from the labor market.120

In his book Intellectuals in Arab Civilization al-Jabiri, also draws our attention to the special position of Ibn Rushd in regard to equality between the sexes, but with some reservation:

One of the issues that drew the attention of contemporary researchers and thought to Ibn-Rushd was his call for equality (fairness) to a woman, as well as his not excluding her from becoming a philosopher or a governor. It is adequate to say that Ibn Rushd was clarifying Plato’s thought on the subject. And although he accepted Plato’s thought willingly, it was with the cautionary position of Islamic law.121

In regards to women participation in wars, however, Ibn Rushd makes a

smooth entry, as if it was an established fact, assuring in his clarification of

Plato that it was an accepted practice among other nations, anyway.

In the contexts wisdom and philosophy, Ibn Rushd similarly affirms that some

women are raised with a great deal of wisdom and intellectual abilities, and for

this reason it is not impossible to find wise women. Here, he introduces a

different legislation than the Islamic one to make a comparison, naming other

legislations (such as Mousawi122, in regard to Judaism) that also do allow

Imama for women.

Still, Ibn Rushd explicitly objects to the prohibition of women from Imama claiming that

some women flourish with noble intelligence and brainpower, which makes it not

unfeasible to attain amongst them sensible and presidential women, albeit many men

think that this is infrequent and despite the prohibitions that make women ineligible for

the Imamate. On the other hand, Ibn-Rushd does point out that some laws entitle

women to such positions as long as they are deemed appropriate; they also consider

                                                                                                                         120  Al-­‐Jabiri,  M.,  Intellectuals  in  the  Arab  Civilization,  Introduction,  pp.  61-­‐62.  121 Al- Jabiri, M., Intellectuals in the Arab Civilization, Center for Arab Unity study, First Edition, Beirut, (1995), p. 141.

122  The  word  is  originating  from  Mousa.  

43  

43  

that a woman can be a philosopher, as well as a ruler, and hence can be the Imam.123

If one investigates why Ibn Rushd made a comparison between Judaism as a religion

that refuses Imama for women and Plato who allows it in his Republic, and didn’t

mention Islam, it is obviously because taking Imama in its religious sense as a

function associated with the rituals performed by Muslims specifically, he realized that

Muslim Scholars would reject the possibility of a woman Imam, and that hadith

prohibits it. In his Commentary, he admits:

The scholars didn’t agree on the Imamate of women, and mostly agree that it is not permitted for a woman to lead a man. However, in regard to her leading women in prayer, some (the Maliki) prohibited it whereas others (the Shafi’i) allowed it, as did Tabari. Still, the consensus among the jumhur is that a woman is to be prohibited from leading men, claiming that if it were allowed, it would have been referred to previously.124

Ibn Rushd’s statement is clear. He admits that from a legal point of view a woman

does not have a right to the Imamate, as do men. He was of course not referring to

the religious ritual Imama, but relating to the political meaning. He wanted to say to his

readers, that philosophically, women are fit to rule and to produce wisdom, and they

do not lack the means even if the religions don’t see it as applicable. Ironically, while

Ibn Rushd, does not give a woman the right to be an Imam at prayer in a mosque, he

philosophically acknowledges her right to assume the task of becoming a ruler in the

state.

It is significant to understand that irrespective of his evading the deliberation on

Quranic texts in respect to women, nonetheless Ibn Rushd critically views the

perception of women as inferior. Thus, he does not retreat from admitting to the

likelihood of women in taking the rule of governance in the state. Ibn Rushd usually

used his own interpretation and insights in different issues with the laws. Here,

however, he justifies the position of philosophy on this subject, rather than make his

own interpretation.

                                                                                                                         123  Thahabi,  Hasan  Majeed  Obeidi  and  Kathem,  Fatima.  Ibn-­‐Rushd  Talkhees  Assiyasa  Li  Aflaton  (muhawaret  al  Jumhouriya  ),  p.125.  124  Ibn-­‐Rushd.   Bidayat   al   Mujatahid   wa   Nihayat   al-­‐Muqtased,   Part   1,   Dar   al   Kalam,   First   Edition,   Beirut,  (1988),  pp.148-­‐149.  

44  

44  

Truly concerned about women’s misery, Ibn Rushd wrote that women were so

reduced in servitude that all their capacity for higher pursuits had been

destroyed. He was distressed by their fate, stating that they only live like plants,

looking after their men. This obligated him to write:

Our society allows no scope for the development of women’s talents. They seem to be destined exclusively to childbirth and the care of children, and this State of servility has destroyed their capacity for larger matters. It is thus that we see no women endowed with moral virtues; they live their lives like vegetables, devoting themselves to their husbands. From this stems the misery that pervades our cities, for women outnumber men by more than double and cannot procure the necessities of life by their own labors. 125

In what seems to be an audacious account Ibn-Rushd proclaims that:

Women in this state are twice in numbers as men, and they are kept from working except, rarely, in an appropriate labor, and this restricted “rarity,” such as sewing or embroidery, is barely sufficient to help them survive.126

At this juncture, it is central to note that Ibn Rushd rejected Aristotle’s position on

women participation in public life and limiting women’s functions to household duties,

notwithstanding Aristotle’s occasional instances of elevating women’s role. Ibn Rushd

opts not to employ any of Aristotle’s views of women and instead uses their

concurrent condition as an illustration for his comparison. Ibn Rushd believed that a

prosperous society is a society that includes both men and women in the work force,

as much as a miserable society excludes women. He makes it a natural conclusion

that the exclusion of half of the society (women) from actively participating in

workforce effects the economical situation of that society negatively.

Afterward he confirms that:

Females must join males in wars and combat. And it is apt that as we select, to choose women with qualities that are comparable with males. And this can merely be attained if females learn,

                                                                                                                         125  Thahabi,  Hasan  Majeed  Obeidi  and  Kathem,  Fatima.  Ibn-­‐Rushd  Talkhees  Assiyasa  Li  Aflaton  (muhawaret  al  Jumhouriya  ),  p.126.  126  Ibid.    

45  

45  

concurrently with males, music and sports. Likewise, Plato has revealed that consequently there is nothing to dread from them (females) even if they practice sports naked (uncovered) with men, as long as they are endowed with virtue.127

And then he resumes the assertion to clarify that all women should take their

suitable status among the state precisely like men, and they should grip

equivalent positions to men. The Commentary on Plato’s Republic reveals

according to Rosenthal;

A side of Ibn Rushd that is not to be found in his other commentaries. Ibn Rushd carried on a long tradition of attempted syntheses between religious law and Greek philosophy; he went beyond his predecessors in spite of a large-scale dependence upon them. He made Plato’s political philosophy, modified by Aristotle, his own and considered it valid for the Islamic state as well. Consequently, he applied Platonic ideas to the contemporary Almoravid and Almohad States in a sustained critique in using Platonic terms, convinced that if the philosopher cannot rule, he must try to influence policy in the direction of the ideal state. For Plato’s ideal state is the best, after the ideal state of Islam based on and centered in the Sharia’s as the ideal constitution. Thus, he regrets the position of women in Islam compared with their civic equality in Plato’s Republic. That women are used only for childbearing and the rearing of offspring is detrimental to the economy and responsible for the poverty of the state. This was a most unorthodox position.128

I would support Catarina Belo’s introductory remarks:

One would expect Ibn Rushd to follow the approach that pervades the majority of the philosophical writings on women. More particularly, one would assume his espousal of Aristotle’s conceptions, for Averroes, Aristotle’s low regard for woman as compared to man is well known. Moreover, his philosophy privileges the category of action over the category of passion, and actuality is always considered worthier than potentiality.129

Of course it could not be that his progressive views about women caused him trouble,

                                                                                                                         127  Thahabi,  Hasan  Majeed  Obeidi  and  Kathem,  Fatima.  Ibn-­‐Rushd  Talkhees  Assiyasa  Li  Aflaton  (muhawaret  al  Jumhouriya  ),  p.126.  128 Rozenthal, E. Averroes. Encyclopaedia Britannica.http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/45595/Averroes/512/Contents-and-significance-of-works.

129Belo,  Catarina.   Some  Considerations  on  Averroes'  Views  Concerning  Women  and  Their  Role   in  Society,  (2002),  p.2.  

46  

46  

but how much could it be of a coincidence that this type of thinking is somehow

connected to the views on women? It could be a mere state of virtuous attitude. A

person, who is decent enough to be a free thinker, cannot be trapped inside ideas that

help deteriorate the status of those who form half the making of a society.

Somewhere, in between, Ibn Rushd’s enlightened ideas led to his progressive

thoughts towards women, which made him revolutionary. But at the same time, his

bold opinion about the current state is connected to his progressive views towards

women.

Even though, as stressed before, his views on women wouldn’t have been the reason

for his crisis. It is important to note that women’s predicaments were, and are in place

and takes a lot of courage and persistence, in many ways, to fight for them.

47  

47  

6. Conclusion

It is a well-known fact for researchers on the Islamic medieval era that the

influence of Greek Philosophy, namely, of Plato’s and Aristotle’s works, has played a

major role on the progress of ideas and various intellectual fields. As such, their

influence was far reaching when it came to women’s issues. Al-Ghazālī tried to refute

philosophy, and worked hard to keep people away from its teachings. It could have

been an organized way of controlling societies. If a lay Muslim realized that what he

learnt about the universe and creation from one side, and norms that include

behaviors and jurisprudence have been all previously discussed, studied, and

analyzed by Greek philosophers, scholars, as al-Ghazālī would have lost the influence

they had over lay people. The secrets of knowledge needed to be kept only accessible

with certain people who alone could give access to the information they wanted to

reveal. What is more dangerous would have been to know that those norms were not

necessarily articulated within the Quran and the Ḥadīth; the only accessible reference

to a good Muslim for knowledge of the universe and devotion. In al- Ghazālī’s case

“scholars agree that the Ḥadīth that he reports are often without any source, or only

selective Ḥadīth s that are more restrictive of women are mentioned without taking into

consideration other ones that directly contradict these. His weakness in the science of

Hadith is well-known.”130

Al-Ghazālī wanted to keep this piece of knowledge to himself, and branded himself as

the “Reviver” and the “Deliverer” and took the burden of putting all the guidance that a

Muslim would need claiming that his findings were based on the Quran and the

Sunna.

                                                                                                                         130 Farouk, M Omar, Introductory comments from Counsels to Kings http://globalwebpost.com/farooqm/ Ch IV study_res/Ghazālī/women_good_bad.html. Taj-ud-Din Subki has collected such traditions in Tabaqat-Shafeiyya that have been cited by al-Ghazālī in his Ihya, which cannot be traced to any source. See: Farouk, M Omar, Introductory comments from Counsels to Kings,

48  

48  

The resemblance between Aristotle’s household guidelines and al-Ghazālī’s detailed

guidelines on family matters and all related household activities could not have been a

coincidence. While al-Ghazālī developed a new technique in Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn the

concept of the structure is very similar to Aristotle Politics. It is also important to note

here that Aristotle’s Politics wasn’t directly introduced to Muslim scholars including al-

Ghazālī directly. When I refer to Aristotle’s writings in general, Aristotle could be

accessible to al-Ghazālī through other philosophers such as Galen. It is not about the

style, but also it is about the adaptation of thought. How Aristotle perceived women,

and forged a philosophical consensus regarding her nature, was also al-Ghazālī ’s

style here. It was about making a clear affirmation on the inferiority of women both in

capability and nature.

Al-Ghazālī remains well known for by his unprecedented detailed explanations of

sexual life for Muslim men and women, but researching Aristotle’s work, it is easy to

note how much Aristotle has discussed the issue in details in many of his works,

especially in his Politics and the Generation of Animals.

It is also true that Aristotle misogynist approach is clear. As in the case with al-

Ghazālī, Aristotle’s perspective on women seems unaccounted for. History tells a

normal story of his personal life. His wife died at an early age, and he never remarried,

had a child and a long-term partner. However, the encounter with Roxana the wife of

Alexander could have been a reason for his vicious judgment against women, when

Aristotle who apparently falls in love with her, agrees to allow her to mount him in the

garden before she succumbs to him. When confronted, Aristotle responded:” If she

has the power to degrade a man of my age, just imagine what she is capable of doing

to you.”131

Whether this story is a fact or a myth, it brings some resemblance with al-Ghazālī’s

encounter with Turkan Khatun, which highlights the hidden power of emperors or

sultans wives inside the decision making circles. It is a power that influenced the

sultans’ decisions on many levels that including political ones.

                                                                                                                         131  Yavari.  Pp.335-­‐336.  

49  

49  

Al- Ghazālī regarded women in the same way, inferior in nature and evil in nature.

In the household, he perceived the wife’s role as a role that maybe a little bit higher

than that of a servant, but lesser than that of a companion. A woman has a serving

role in the house and to her master, the husband. Al-Ghazālī perceived marriage as a

form of slavery, not as an institution that prepares for the well being of the society

through the woman as Aristotle did.

Moreover, in al-Ghazālī’s islamization of the Aristotelian structure and theories on

women, he added the options of men having up to four wives and unlimited

concubines and female slaves. Interestingly, al-Ghazālī describes women in Kasr al-

Shahwataiyn as the source of all seduction while men are only targets to the

seduction of the evilness of devilish women. He regards man as a victim to the

temptation of the planned seduction of women. However, in the Adab al-Nikah, man

takes control over his desire, and he seems to need as many women as he can

handle in order to achieve his seemingly unrestrained desires.

In Kasr al Shahwataiyn, al-Ghazālī was preaching as a Sufi, whereas, in Adab an

Nikah, he was putting rules to society. Marriage for Muslims is an important pillar for

building a society, and reproduction is its major component. The state of the ultimate

outreached situation of devotion to the love of the Creator through Sufism could be

contradictory to the social structure that Islam called for. This could be the reason,

why the two books, though both within Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, seem to be written with two

different mindsets, sharing mainly the stressing point and confirmation on the evilness

of women and their narrow mindedness and limitations.

Al-Ghazālī confirms in his Naṣiḥat al Muluk that God has punished women in the following statement:

As for the distinctive characteristics with which God on High has punished women, (the matter is as follows). When Eve (disobeyed Almighty God and) ate fruit which He had forbidden to her from the tree in Paradise, the Lord, be He praised, punished women with eighteen things: 1) menstruation; 2) childbirth; 3) separation from mother and father and marriage to a stranger; 4) pregnancy; 5) not having control over her own person; 6) (having) a lesser share in inheritance; 7) her liability to be divorced and inability to divorce; 8)

50  

50  

its being lawful for men to have four wives, but for a woman to have (only) one husband: 9) the fact that she must stay secluded in the house;10)the fact that she must keep her head covered inside the house;11) (the fact that) two women’s testimony (has to be )set against the testimony of one man; 12) the fact that she must not go out of the house unless accompanied by a near relative; 13) the fact that men take part in Friday and Feast Day prayers and funerals while women do not ; 14) disqualification for ruler-ship and judgement;15) the fact that merit has one thousand components,(only) one of which is (attributable) to women, while nine hundred and ninety nine are (attributable) to men; 16) the fact that if women are profligate they will be given (only) half as much torment as (the rest of) the (Muslim) community at the Resurrection Day; 18) the fact that if their husbands divorce them they must observe a waiting period of three months or three menstruations (before remarrying).132

This sums up all his views and judgments regarding women. He makes an

interpretation of all the codes and guidelines in Islamic teachings in eighteen points

that determines women status through what he confirmed was God’s own decision.

Despite the existing arguments among scholars regarding the authenticity of the last

part of the book. His points remain valid with his starting chapter that begins with

condemnation of women.

For a reader of Arabic literature mainly in the twentieth century, these

descriptions seem coming out directly from Noble Prize award winning Egyptian writer

Najib Mahfouz’s Cairo Trilogy, that continued to be produced in films and TV series

until this day. A practice of a typical Muslim family in which al-Ghazālī successfully

transformed into his own vision until this day. The role of a superior master inside a

framework of a family that consists of subordinates to the male’s needs and

accommodations. What is in this sense a full guideline from al- Ghazālī is practiced as

if it is Divine’s given orders?

This brings the assumption that al- Ghazālī aimed as Garden described it, “to

transform the religious landscape of his tradition, summoning all to his vision, an

agenda he presented as nothing less than the restoration to life of a religious tradition

                                                                                                                         132  Al-­‐Ghazali.  (Trans.  By  Frank  R.C.Bagley),  Naṣiḥat  al-­‐Muluk,  pp.164-­‐165.  

51  

51  

that had been killed by its very practitioners. He meant the title of the work very

literally; al-Ghazali was a revivalist, and the Revival was a work of revivalism.”133

It remains a thin line in the debates to discuss the information and the

teachings that certain scholars brought in until this day. Al-Ghazālī describes the role

of a woman in Adab an Nikah in what could be summarized in page 124 of the book in

the earlier section.

In a society that is deeply entangled in beliefs that insist to tie them to the past, al-

Ghazālī remains a prominent figure whose importance extends to that of the Prophet

himself.

Muslim societies remain composed of minds that al-Ghazālī and his peers called “al-

Awâm” and they insist to only take what they agreed is the closest words to God in

Islamic teaching through al-Ghazālī as a model from one side, or through ibn-Taymiya

as another model.

In the current fight over extremism represented by Da’esh (ISIS)134, whose supporters

come from ibn Taymiya’s school of thinking, al-Ghazālī remains to represent the

moderate non-extremist view of Muslim societies.

Scholars of al-Ghazālī, on both sides, busied themselves by accusing him for being a

misogynist without really researching his intentions, his other works (apart from his

views on abstinence and marriage) and some scholars defended him by giving him

credit for the supposed “enlightenment” of Islamic thought, focusing on comparing his

views to the radical school of thinking represented by Ibn Taymiya, and thus

representing him as a liberal Muslim; and judging his views on women in comparison

with the radical school.

                                                                                                                         133  Garden.  First  Islamic  Reviver,  p.  104.    134     Islamic   State   in   Iraq   and   Syria   came   to   existence   in   2014.   ISIS   is   an   extremist   offshoot   of   Saudi  Wahhabi/Salafi   doctrines,   themselves   an   extremist   version   of   Islam;   and   a  missionary   version,   using   huge  Saudi  oil   resources   to   spread   their   teachings   throughout  much  of   the  Muslim  world.    See:   Chomsky,  Noam.  What   links   ISIS   to   the   World   War?   (Article)Plymouth   Institute   for   Peace   Research,  http://stopwar.org.uk/news/noam-chomsky-what-links-isis-to-world-war-1-gaza-and-nuclear-catastrophe,  (16,Oct.2014).  

52  

52  

In discussions with scholars of al-Ghazālī specifically; 135 the idealization of al-

Ghazālī remains in considering him as the reviver. When asking those scholars why

we as Muslims would not adopt Ibn Rushd School, while the West took his

teachings as a model to the West as we see today, the answer is interesting to

notice. The common response is what did Ibn Rushd have to offer? The contempt

against ibn-Rushd and his Tahafut al-tahafut put him in a rivalry position with al-

Ghazālī, and hence led to his works and his achievements in the enlightenment era

of medieval Islam to being marginalized and disregarded.

The Muslim world will remain in this state of backwardness in its views on societies

that include inferiority of women and superiority of men, as long as Islamic teaching is

represented through two poles of patriarchal inspired teachings, one in a disguise of

extremism and another in the disguise of moderation.

Ibn Rushd’s thoughts which aim to portray women as equal to men still needs to be

applied both within the Muslim world, and the entire world generally. This is by no

means intended as an idealization of Ibn Rushd’s views. , The fact that there are

many points of disagreement that mount with Ibn Rushd views, especially in

comparing his views in the fatwas in Fasl al Maqâl and Bidayat al Mujtahid for

instance, and his views in the commentary of Plato; his critiques could accuse him of

hypocrisy and double standards. Ibn Rushd is a good example of an attempt at

harmonizing religious beliefs based on Islamic teaching and logic based on philosophy

from one side, and his own living experience in his time and society. Ibn Rushd’s

attempt to effect changes inside the then current cultural and political structure of his

time is what makes his views respectable and worth of applying in my view. His

thoughts and views were more progressive in my opinion even when compared to

Plato’s in this regard. This is because Ibn Rushd did not seek to create an Ideal

State, but wanted a livable state for its entire people taking into consideration their

potential capabilities. His criticism of women in their economical role is in fact an

important component to his views on equality: A position Ibn Rushd took a step

                                                                                                                         135  Specialized  Scholars  on  al-­‐Ghazali  in  Palestine.  

53  

53  

beyond to Plato in actualizing roles for women in his own society through the ideal

concept of state in Plato’s Republic.

The courage Ibn Rushd took in presenting his ideas towards women, are still needed

to be promoted in todays Muslim societies. In many ways, Ibn Rushd harmonized

methodology that included his perception in dealing with the issue of women in trying

to maintain the sensitivities of what is perceived as tradition and social norms from

one side, and insisting on dealing with women as fellow citizens that are an integral

part of creating a good society.

It remains to be true, that societies cannot take a step forward civilization as long as

women in such societies are perceived as inferior.

54  

54  

7. Bibliography

1. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamed. Ihya' Ulum al-din.Commented by:Jamal Mahmoud&Mohammad Sayyed. (6 Parts ).2nd ed. Dar al Fajr li-turath, Cairo, Egypt. 2010.

2. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. Book on the Etiquette of Marriage .Part two : Customs in the Book. In The Revival of Religious Sciences, edited by www.Ghazālī.org, translated by Madelain Farah.

3. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid.At-tibr al-Masbouk fi Nasihet al Mulouk. Intellectual Encounters . Cairo: al Adab and Al Muayyed Publications, 1317 AD.

4. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. (Translated by Frank R.C.Bagley), Counsel for Kings: Naṣiḥat al-Muluk. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1964.

5. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. Condemnation of the World. Book six from Rub' il Muhlikat. Revival of Religious Sciences. edited by www.Ghazālī.org.

6. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. Kitab Adab An-Nikah . The Revival of Religious Sciences. edited by www.Ghazālī.org.

7. Al- Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. Mizan al-'Amal ( The Scale Of Action). Edited by : Suleiman Dunia (1st ed), Dar al Ma’aref . Egypt (1964). www.ghazali.org.

8. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid Mohammad. Al Munqidh Min al Dhalal. Edited by Mohammad I Hazien and Shatha R. Abdallah.www.islamicphilosophy.org.

9. Al-Ghazālī, Abu Hamid. On Breaking the Two Desires. Book 3 : The Ways to Perish. The Revival of Religious Sciences. translated by Caesar Faraha. Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1992.

10. Aristotle. On the Generation of Animals. Translated by Arthur Platt. Web Edition published by eBooks@adelaide. Last updated 26.2.2014. The University of Adelaide Library. S.Australia.

11. Aristotle. The History of Animals .Ttranslated by D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson. ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/aristotle/history/index.html, 2014.The universtiy of Adelaide Library. S.Australia.

12. Arkoun, Mohamed. Averroes and Maimonedes:Master Minds of 12th Century Medieval Thought. www.simerg.com.

13. Belo, Catarina. Some Considerations on Averroes' Views Concerning Women and Their Role in Society. 2009.

14. Butterworth, Charles. Ethics in Medieval Islamic Philosophy. Journal of Religious Ethics 11, no. 2 (1983): 1983

15. Cera R. Lawrence. On the Generation of Animals, by Aristotle. The Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Http/embryo.asu.edu/pages/generation-animals-aristotle#sthash.cs1LFpss.dpuf 16. Clayton, Edward. Aristotle:Politics. Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. 2005. http://www.iep.utm.edu/aris-pol/#SH7e.

55  

55  

17. Chomsky, Noam. What links ISIS to the World War? (Article)Plymouth Institute for Peace Research, http://stopwar.org.uk/news/noam-chomsky-what-links-isis-to-world-war-1-gaza-and-nuclear-catastrophe  (16,Oct.2014).  

18. Fraenkel, Carlos. On the Concept and History of Philosophical Religions. In Philosophical Religions from Plato to Spinoza , pp.35-81. Cambridge University Press, 2013.

19. Fraenkel, Carlos. Philosophy and Exegesis in Al-Farabi,Averroes,and Moimonedes. 2 2008. www.academia.edu (accessed 1 27, 2014).

20. Gutas, Dimitri. The Study of Arabic PHilosophy in the 20th Century.An Essay on Historiography of Arabic Philosophy.

21. Garcia, John David. Civilization and Ethics, chapter 4.. http://www.see.org (accessed 3 15, 2014). 1991.

22. Garden, Kenneth. The First Islamic Reviver. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014.

23. Hallaq, Wael, An Introduction To Sunni Usul al Fiqh. Cambridge University Press, 1997.

24. Hye, M. Abdul. Ash'arism ,ch.11. Edited by Edited and Introduced by M.M.Sharif A history of Muslim Philosophy. M.A, Ph.D Professor of PHilosphy ,government College,Rajshahi (Pakistan) M.Abdul Hye. www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/14.htm.

25. Ibn Rushd, Abu al Walid. Fasl Al Maqal fi Taqrir ma bayna al Shari'ah wal Hikma min al Ittisal. Edited by Mohammad Abed Al Jabiri. Beirut: Arab Unit Center, 1997.

26. Ibn Rushd, Abu al-Walid. Talkhees Al Siyasa. Translated by Hasan Majid Al Abeidi & Fatima Kathem Athahabi. Beirut: Dar Al Tali'ah, 1998.

27. Islam. www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/arab-y67s11.asp. Fordhum University. (accessed 1 27, 2014).

28. Jawin, Alexandra. The Ideal Role of Women in Plato's and Aristotle's Societies, St. Andrews University, http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/. 2012.

29. Leaman, O. & Nasr, S.H. History of Islamic Philosophy. Part 1. Edited by Leaman O & Nasr S.H. London: Routledge , 1996.

30. Leaman, Oliver. Ibn-Rushd, Abu al Walid Mohammad Ahmad. www.oxfordislamicstudies.com (accessed 1 27, 2014). 1997.

31. Leaman ,Oliver. An Introduction to Medieval Islamic Philosophy."Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (Cambridge University PRess) 49, no. 2: 389-390.

32. Leo, Strauss. Persecution and the Art of Writing . Edited by Miriam Strauss. The Univiersity of Chicago Press, 1980.

33. Mayhew, Robert. The Female in Aristotle's Biology. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.

34. Mahmoud, Ibrahim. Sex in Quran. London: Riad Al-Rayyes Books Ltd, 1994. 35. Macksood , Aftab. Historicizing Al-Ghazālī and His Influence. Masters Thesis

in History of Science. Extension School,Harvard University. www.muslimphilosophy.com/aftab/Ghazālīthesis, May 30, 2013.

36. Marvin, C. Philosophers: Abu Hamid al-Ghazālī. Prod. Trincoll.edu. 2008.

56  

56  

37. Mccarthy, R.J. , Al-Ghazālī. Al-Ghazālī's Path to Sufism: his Deliverance from Error al-Munqidh min al-Dalal. 1. Translated by R.J Mccarthy. Louisville: Fons Vitae,US, 2001.

38. Melamed, Avraham. Philosopher, King, Prophet. In The Philosopher King in Medieval and Renaissance. Sunypress.edu.

39. Mernissi, Fatima. The Veil and The Male Elite. Translated by Mary Jo Lakeland. NY: Perseus Publishing, 1991.

40. New World Encyclopedia. ed. Aspasia. Prod. www.newworldencyclopedia.org. 11 15, 2012.

41. O'connor, F .JJ & Robertson, E. www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk. www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Aristotle.html.

42. Orwin, Alexander. Beauty, Diversity, and Transience . Revisiting Democracy in Al-Farabi and Averroes. www.ichicago.edu. 2013.

43. Plato. The Republic . http://www.idph.com.br/conteudos/ebooks/republic.pdf . 5 18, 2002. (accessed 5 1, 2014).

44. Prudence, Allen. The Concept of Woman: The Early Humanist Reformation,1250-1500. Vol. 1, 65-185. NY: WM.B.Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003.

45. Prudence, SR , Allen. Plato ,Aristotle, and the Concept of Woman in Early Jewish Philosophy. Canada ,(1987) .

46. Reagan, J. Richard. Thomans Aquinas Commentary of Aristotle's Politcs. ebook. Translated by Richard J.Reagan. Cambridge: Hacket Publishing Comapany,Inc, 2007.

47. Rozenthal, E. Averroes' Commentary on Plato's Republic. Brill . http://www.jstor.org/1579942. (1968/1969) . Pp.436-439

48. Rozenthal, Franz. Knowledge Triumphant:The concept of knowledge in medieval Islam. Vol. 2. Boston: Brill, 2007.

49. Rosenthal, E. Averroes (Muslim Philosopher): Contents and Signinficance of Works. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2 2014, 2014.

50. Shields, Chrisotpjer. Aristotle." Edited by plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, september 2008.

51. Smith, Justin E.H. Phyllis Rides Aristotle. Prod. Berfois. 4 17, 2013. 52. Smith, N. Plato and Aristotle on the Nature of Women. Journal of History of the

History of Philoophy 21, no. 4: 467-478.

53. Spektorsky, Susan A. Women in Classical Islamic Law. A Survey of the Sources. (Themes in Islamic Studies: vol.: 5) Brill. Leiden. 2010.

54. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 814 2007. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/al-Ghazālī/ (accessed 10 26, 2013).

55. Stowasser, Barbara Freyer. Women in the Qur'an, Traditions, and interpretation. NY: Oxford University Press, 1993.

56. Treiger, Alexander. Inspired Knowledge in Islamic Thought: Al-Ghazālī’s Theory of Mystical Cognition and Its Avicenna Foundation. Routledge: 1ed. 2011.

57  

57  

57. Wafi, Ali Abdel Wahed. Al-Farabi's Al-Madina Al-Fadila. Nahdat Misr for Printing and Publishing.

58. Wansbrough, J. & Hourani G. Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics. Cambridge University Press, 1985.

59. Watt, Montgomery. The Faith and Practice of Al-Ghazālī. 9-92. Boston: Oneworld Publications, 1994.

60. Weiss, Bernard C. The Formation of Islamic Law. In The Spirit of Islamic Law. 1-23. The University of Georgia Press, 1988.

61. Wener. Rebecca. Gender and Space in Arabic-Islamic Countries. Mount Holyoke College, https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/mjiyad/forum/messages/221.shtml. (Retrieved 21.10.2014.) 15,May 2007.

62. Yavari, Neguin. Polysemous Texts and Reductionist Readings:Women and Heresy in thr Siyar al-Muluk. In Views from the Edge:Essays in Honor of Richard W.Bulliet, 322-346. NY: Columbia University Press, 2004.