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