The Book 'Ihyaa 'Uloommud-Deen' in The Scale of the Scholars Historians

KITAAB IHYAA'U 'ULOOM UD-DEEN FEE MEEZAN AL 'ULAMAA'I WAL MU'ARRAKMEEN
The Book 'Ihyaa 'Uloommud-Deen' in The Scale of the Scholars Historians

By Shaikh 'Alee Hasan 'Alee 'Abdul-Hameed

TRANSLATION OF THE TEXT

All praise is for Allaah, we praise Him and seek His aid and ask for His forgiveness, and we seek refuge in Allaah from the evils of ourselves and from our evil actions. He whom Allaah guides, there is none can lead him astray, and he whom Allaah misguides, there is none can guide him. I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah, Alone, having no partner, and I bear witness that MuHammad is His slave and His Messenger.

Ammaa ba'd:

This is a small treatise, singular in its subject -inshaaAllaah ta'aalaa. I have gathered in it some of the sayings of the people of knowledge' (Investigating all of them would have been something difficult for the researcher, so maybe what I have qouted will be sufficient for the one who reflects) - the imaams, the scholars and the historians - about a book which is well-known among the people in general, the educated, the scholars and the ignorant, and it is the book "IHyaa' Uloomud-Deen" of Shaikh Aboo Haamid al-Ghazzaalee, whom Allaah caused to pass away in the year 505H -raHimahullaah wa 'afaa'anhu.

These sayings which I have gathered and the texts which I have quoted here are all on one of the two sides of the scales - that of correction and amendment and that is the unknown page in the knowledge of this book!!

As for the other side of the scales, it has already been made heavy by the older and newer writers. So of old, ash-shaikh 'Abdul Qaadir al 'Aidaroos wrote his book, "An Announcement of the Excellent Qualities of al-IHyaa'", and it is in print and is well-known.

Of recent times, the book has received much praise, such as that from Shaikh Sa'eed Hawwaa who advises people to read it [Aafaaq ut-Ta'aaleem, p.77] and he holds it to be from the source books for Islaamic morals [Jundullaah, p. 1191], etc. All of this is in fulfilment of what Shaikh al-Bannaa said in describing his call as being truly Sufi, and (Sa'eed) Hawwaa is not saying something new in speaking of "al-IHyaa'" but rather following Shaikh Hasan al-Bannaa (raHimahullaah), since he used to study it after the attendance of the Sufi Tareeqah of the Hasaafiyyah [Mudhakkaraat ud-Da'wah, p.29] to the extent that he was affected by that in his general behaviour [Mudhakkaraat..., p.321. Rather he regarded it to be the greatest encyclopedia of Islaam (!), and one of his ambitions was that he would be able to write an explanation of this book. He actually began to do that since he started a weekly lesson of its explanation in his house for a group of his companions, and he was careful to write down every lesson which he gave from it in a notebook, and he had not used to do this for his other lessons. However, he was not able to complete it [al-Ikhwaan ul-Muslimoon: Happenings... 1/61 & 2/347J.

Shaikh-ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (raHimahullaah) spoke both in praise and in criticism of this book when he was asked about it and the book called "Qoot-ul-Quloob", as occurs in "Majmoo' ul-Fataawaa, [10/55]" He (raHimahullaah) replied after analysing it in a scholarly and admirable manner. so it is good that I should quote it in full. (Other quotes from him will be brought later inshaaAllaah.) He said, "The book Qoot-ul- Quloob" and the book al-IHyaa'" both speak on the same topic of the actions of the heart such as, 'patience', 'thankfulness'. 'love'. 'reliance' and 'tawHeed', etc.

Aboo Talib (he is of Makkah and wrote "Qoot-ul-Quloob" which is in print and well-known) is more knowledgeable as regards Hadeeth and reports and the sayings of the Sufi scholars of the heart and others compared to Aboo Haamid al-Ghazzaalee, and his (Aboo Taalibs) words are more correct and precise, and further away from Bid'ah (innovation in the Deen), even though there are weak and fabricated aHaadeeth (plural of Hadeeth) in "Qoot-ul-Quloob" and many rejected things.

As for what is stated in "aI-IHyaa'" about the destructive affairs such as his talk about 'pride', 'vanity', 'ostentation','envy'. etc., most of it is taken from al-Haarith al-MuHaasibee's book "ar-Ri'yaayah" - and part of it is acceptable, part to be rejected, and parts of it are disagreed about!
"Al-IHyaa'" contains many beneficial points, but it contains objection- able subjects, since it contains corrupt talks of the philosophers about TawHeed, Prophethood, and the Hereafter. Mentioning the 'knowledge' of the Sufis is like taking an enemy of the Muslims and dressing him up in Muslim clothes.

The scholars of the Deen (religion) have criticised Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee) for this and said: He was made ill by "ash-Shifaa' (The Cure)" of Ibn Seenaa (Avicenna) in philosophy. [One of the books of logic as mentioned in "Kashf az-Zunoon [2/1055]", and see what Ibn Taymiyyah says about it in "Majmoo' ul-Fataawaa - 13/238]
It contains many aHaadeeth and reports which are weak, rather fabricated (maudoo'), and it contains many mistakes and lies of the Sufis.

Along with that it also contains sayings of the Shaikhs of the Sufis who have knowledge and are upright regarding actions of the heart, being in accordance with the Book and the Sunnah, and other things concerning worship and behaviour, which also conform to the Book and the Sunnah, such things being more than that which is to be rejected. Therefore the opinions of the people vary and they differ about it." [End of what he says - raHimahullaah]

Nothing has persuaded me to write this book except sincere advice for the sake of Allaah and for His Messenger (sailaitaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and the Muslims, and hope, to correct the paths taken and to straighten people's thinking and direction, particularly since ignorance of the Islaamic Sciences have become widespread which is, by Allaah, one of the greatest disasters. Finally. I ask Allaah, the Sublime and Most High and I seek His favour by my love for the greatest of His Messengers (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) that He should write for me recompense and reward. Verily He it is Who hears and answers, and our final word is that all praise is for Allaah, Lord of all creation.

(1) AT-TURTOOSHEE (d.520H)

He said in writing to 'Abdullaah ibn al-Muzaffar about al-Ghazzaalee:

"When he wrote his book, he called it "IHyaa 'Uloom ud-Deen", and talked about the sciences of the states of things and ways of the Sufis in it. but he was neither well acquainted with them nor well-informed about them, so he fell headlong, and thus did not fall either among the scholars of the Muslims or within the conditions of the Sufi ascetics.

He filled his book with lies upon the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu 'aiaihi wa sallam), and I do not know of any book upon the surface of the earth which attributes more lies to the Prophet (saltallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) than this one! He moulded it with the opinions of the philosophers and concepts held in the "Rasaa'il Ikhwaanis-suffaa." They (the Ikhwaanus-suffaa) are a people who regard Prophethood as a level that can be acquired, and the Prophet is in their view no more than a noble person with excellent character who avoided what is ignoble and took hold of his own soul until he had it under control so that no desire overcame it, nor bad manners overtook it, then he took control of nature with those manners."

Then he says:

"Allaah honoured Islaam and made clear its proofs and established its clear signs, and has cut off the excuses of the creation with its clear proofs and decisive evidences which pierce the brain.

The one who seeks to aid the Deen of Islaam with the opinions of the philosophers and views of the people of logic is like the one who seeks to purify water with urine!!

He (al-Ghazzaalee) brings talk which should cause thunder and lightning and which awakens the desires and fills it with longing, so that when the souls do desire it, he says. "This is from the hidden knowledge -and it is not permissible to write it in the book", or he says,' "This is from the secret of Qadr which we have been forbidden to look into". This is the practice of the Baatiniyyah and the people who have doubts and suspicions regarding the Deen of Allaah. who profit themselves from that which is present and preoccupy the souls with that which is not, so it causes turmoil to the beliefs of the heart and weakens that upon which the Jamaa'ah is united. Thus if a person firmly believes that which he wrote in his book then his being a Kaafir (disbeliever) is not unlikely, and if he does not believe it then how misguided he will still be!

As for what I have mentioned about it being destroyed by the fire, then if it is left, it will spread among the people and among those who do not know the deadly poison it contains, and it is to be feared that they would believe in the correctness of the misguidance therein. So it was burnt in analogy to the Mushafs (copies of the Quraan) which the Companions (radhiAllaahu 'anhum) burnt which had different wordings or missing aayaat (verses of the Qur'aan). Do you not see that if they had not burnt those Mushafs and they had spread among the people then each person would have memorised what he received of them, and they would then perhaps disagree, fight and cut off relations with one another?

I have resolved to take to it and remove all of its errors and make clear its mistakes and point them out one by one, and there is in the rest of the book sufficiency for our brother Muslims and righteous people. Most of those who fall in love with this book are good people but who have no idea what is demanded by intellect and the principles of the religion, nor do they understand matters of belief in Allaah or the truth about His attributes."

(2) AL-MAAZAREE (d.536H)

Al-Haafiz adh-Dhahabee says in "Siyar A'laam an-Nubalaa [19/340J" ...and Imaam MuHammad ibn 'Alee al Maazaree as-Saqilee speaks about "al-IHyaa'" in a way that shows his prominence as an lmaam. He says:

'There have been repeated requests to know our position regarding the book called "IHyaa'u 'Uloom ud-Deen" and I said that the opinions of people differ about It. A group seeks to publicise it and suck blindly to that, a group warns the people against it and causes them to flee from it, and a group who burn it.

The people of the East have also written to me, asking about it, and I have not previously read except parts of it. So if Allaah extends my life, I shall spend time upon it and remove the confusion the people's hearts. Know that I have seen the students of it, and all of them relate to me a part of its condition which take the place of seeing with one's own eyes, so I will briefly mention his condition and that of his book, and some of the positions of the people of TawHeed and of the Sufis, and the people of allusions and philosophy, since his book wavers between all of those!"

Then he (al-Maazaree) said:

"...and in "al-IHyaa'" there are many baseless things, and the habit of the abstemious is not to say, "Maalik said", and "Ash-Shaafi'ee said", except when that is established from them! He approves of things which he builds upon that which has no basis, such as cutting the finger-nails starting with the forefinger due to its excellence over the rest of the fingers, since it is the one for making tasbeeH, then that he should cut the middle one next to it, since it is on the right, and finish with the right thumb, and he reports a narration about it.(Adh-Dhahabee comments on this, saying: it is a fabricated narration) He (al-Ghazzaalee) says, "He who dies after attaining puberty not knowing that the Creator had no beginning, then he dies a Muslim according to ljmaa'(consensus)."

And so one who is lenient about reporting ijmaa about something like this - about which it is more probable that the ijmaa' is the exact opposite - is not worthy of being given credence to what he relates. I found him saying in the first part that he has knowledge which it is not possible to put in a book!! So if that refers to that which is false and baseless then that is true, and if it refers to true knowledge - which is what he intends without a doubt - then why does he not put it into the book? Since if he understands it, then what is to prevent others from understanding it?!"

Adh-Dhahabee says in "as-Siyar [19/330]": I have seen al-Maazarees book "A Disclosure and Notification of the Book al-IHyaa" and it begins:

"All praise is for Allaah who gave the truth light and ascendancy, and destroyed falsehood and removed it..."

Then al-Maazaree quotes some things for which he censures Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee) saying:

"I am amazed at a group of Maalikis who regard Maalik as their Imaam who flee from limitation and avoid putting down a regulation even if there is a narration or an analogy to be made, out of cautiousness and piety and being careful about giving fatwaa (religious verdict) which the people will have to follow, and then they approve of a fatwaa from a man who bases it upon that which is baseless and it contains many reports from the Prophet (sailaltaahu 'alaihi wa sallam), patching together the authentic with that which is not authentic, and likewise that which he reports from the Salaf (the pious predecessors - the Companions and those who followed in their footsteps) and cannot all be authentic, and he quotes 'inspirations' of the 'saints' and outpourlngs of the sincere, which are deemed great, but he mixed the beneficial with the harmful, such as ascriptions which it is not permissible to ascribe due to their repugnance...(to the end)"

Adh-Dhahabi says in the biography of aI-Maazaree in "as-Siyar 120/1071", "He is the author of a refutation of "al-lHyaa'" wherein he explains its errors and philosophy, and he did justice therein -may Allaah have mercy upon him."

          
(3) ABOO BAKR IBN AL'ARABEE (d.543H)

Adh-Dhatabee says in "as-Siyar 119/3371":

In the chapter about 'Tawakkul' in "al-IHyaa'" there occurs, "And all the provision and longevity, and belief and disbelief, which Allaah has divided amongst His creation, then all of it is totally just, and it is not possible for there to be anything better or more complete, and if that were possible and He, the Exalted, being able, did not create it, then it would be miserliness and oppression."

Aboo Bakr ibn al 'Arabee said in "SharHul-Asmaa was-Sifaat":

Our Shaikh Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee) has said something very serious for which the scholars have censured him. He said that there is nothing within the power of Allaah better than this creation in its precision and wisdom, and that if something better were possible or more just and He did not make it, then that would be a deficiency in His generosity. This is impossible.
The answer to that is that he is greatly mistaken in believing in the generality of His power/ability and denying that those created things connected to it can be limited in their extent, but rather the planning/ creation alone of this created world is limited. This philosophical opinion by which the philosophers refer to the heart of the matter and ascribe the perfection to life, for example. and existanee to hearing and seeing. ttitii there does not remain in the heart any way to that which is correct. The Ummah is united against that belief, and all of them without exception say: What He is able to do is unlimited, as for everything that is decreed. not everything is actually present, since the ability is there.

This is an error - may Allaah not establish it. and a mistake for which there is no foundation (A1-Muqbilee in "al-AbHaath al-Musaddadah [p. 542]" comments on this saying of al-Ghazzaalee: "Since that in fact contains a limitation of Allah's power, and the intellect tells that there is no limit to His power or knowledge).

(4) AL-QAADEE 'IYAAD (d.544H)

He said:
"And ash-Shaikh Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee) possesses -repugnant information and in producing shocking works he went beyond bounds in the way of Sufism, and devoted himself to supporting them, and became a caller to that, and wrote well-known books on that (He refers to "al-IHyaa"' as is shown by what comes after).

He was reproached for parts of that and the minds of the Ummah came to have a low opinion of him. Allaah knows that which is hidden about him, and here in the West the order of the Sultaan (ruler) and the ruling of the scholars is that it should be burnt and kept away from, so that was done..."

(5) IBN AL-JAUZEE (d. 597H)

He says in "al-Muntazim [9/169-170]":

"He began to write the book "al-lHyaa'" in al-Quds and finished it in Damascus, however, he wrote it upon the way of the Sufis and did away with the rules of Fiqh in it. For example, regarding effacing of honour and fighting the self, he mentions that a man wished to efface his own honour, so he entered a public bath and put on someone else's clothes, then he put his own clothes on top of them and went out walking slowly so that the people could catch him. So they took them back from him and called him The Thief of the Public Baths'.

Mentioning such things as this for followers to learn from is disgusting because it is judged so according to Fiqh. When there is a guardian for public baths and a person steals, his hand is cut off, and it is not permissible for a Muslim to offer an action for which they would be sinful if they did it!

He mentions that a man bought some meat and found that his soul felt shy to carry it to his house, so he tied it round his neck and walked to his house. This is also totally repugnant and there are many similar things for which this is not the place.
I have gathered together the mistakes of the book and called it "A Notification to the Living Regarding the Errors of al-IHyaa'". and I have pointed some of them out in my book "Talbees Iblees"!

(Also) what he mentions in the book of marriage that 'Aa'ishah said to the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa saUam), "You are the one who claims that you are the Messenger of Allaah!"

That is impossible! Verily the reason for his turning away from the requirements of Fiqh in that which he quotes is that he accompanied the Sufis and regarded their condition to be the goal, and he said, "Indeed I have taken the way from Aboo 'Alee al-Farmadhee and I followed what he directed me to as regards daily worships and continual dhikr (remembering Allaah) until I passed those difficulties and became burdened with heavy tasks, and I did not attain that which I sought.'
Then he looked into the book of Aboo Taalib al-Makkee and into the sayings of the older Sufis, and that completely allured him away from what is demanded by Fiqh.

He mentioned in his book "al-IHyaa'" a lot of fabricated and weak aHaadeeth, and that was due to his insufficient knowledge of narrations- so would that he had submitted them for examination to those who knew - but rather he reported them like one who gathers wood at night (i.e., blindly).

Some people have become infatuated with the book "al-IHyaa'- so I informed that person of its shortcomings and wrote to him, taking out that which needed to be deleted and adding that which was appropriate."

He (Ibn al-Jauzee) said in "Said ul-Khaatir [p.374]" about his (al-Ghazzaalee's) historical mistakes, "And I have seen in the book "IHyaa' 'Uloom ud-Deen" of al-Ghazzaalee that which bewilders regarding mixing up of aHaadeeth and history, so I have collected his mistakes in a book." (He mentioned [p.399] IHyaa' 'Uloom ud-Deen amongs those books which contain stories of hidden horrors and unauthentic aHaadeeth and things which are contrary to the Sharee'ah).

He (Ibn al-Jauzee) said in "Talbees lblees":

"Aboo Haamid al-Ghazzaalee came and composed for them the book "al-IHyaa'" upon the way of the people, and he filled it with baseless aHaadeeth, not knowing their baselessness, and he spoke about hidden knowledge and left the laws of Fiqh and said, 'That which is meant by the stars and the sun and the moon which Ibraheem (salawaatullaahi 'aIaihi) saw is lights which are the veils of Allaah the Great and Glorious, and not the known objects"! This is the same as the talk of the Baatiniyyah!"

He (Ibn al-Jauzee) said in "Minhaaj ul Qaasideen [p.3 of its abridgement] :

"Know that in the book "al-IHyaa'" are dangerous things only known about by the scholars, and the least of them are the baseless and fabricated aHaadeeth, and those which only trace back to the Companions which he relates as being from the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) himself, and verily he merely reported them as he found them, not that he invented them; and it is not allowed to worship using a fabricated Hadeeth, nor to be taken in by a made up wording.
How can it be sanctioned for you to pray prayers of the day and night and the Messenger of Allaah (sallallahu 'aiaihi wa sallam) never said a single word about them!?

How can you allow your hearing to be invaded by the talk of the Sufis which he gathered and encouraged that it be acted upon so much as cannot be counted. As regards his talk about obliteration of the self, continuance, ordering people to suffer starvation and going out touring for no purpose, and entering desolate areas without any provisions, and other things, I have revealed their faults in my book 'Talbees Iblees" and I will write a book for you mentioning its corruptions without forsaking Its benefits."

(6) AN-NAWAWEE (d.676H)

An-Nawawee was asked about Salaatur-Raghaa'ib which is done on the first Jumu'ah of Rajab, whether it is Sunnah, a desirable action or an innovation. So he answered:

"It is an evil and strongly censured innovation."

Then he said:

"And do not be misled by the large number of people who perform it in many lands, nor by Its being mentioned in "Qoot ul Quloob" or "IHyaa' 'Uloom ud-Deen" and their like, since it is a baseless innovation ("al-Mi'yaar ul Maghrib [1/300]" of al-Wanshareesee).

(7) IBN TAIMIYYAH (d.728H)

He says in "Dar'u Ta'aarud-ul 'Aql wan-Naql [5/347]" :

"Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzalee) mentions a long talk in his book "al-IHyaa'" about Outer and Hidden knowledge. He said, "A group explain away that which relates to Allaah's attributes and leave alone that which relates to the Hereafter upon its obvious meaning, and prevent its being interpreted. They are the Ash'arees -that is their later scholars who agree to the author of "al-Irshaad". The Mu'tazilah go further to the point that they explain away His being, the Hearing and the Seeing, and also seeing Him and the Mi'raaj, and that He is not a body. They explain away Punishment of the Grave, the Scales and the Bridge, and a large number of things connected to the Hereafter, but they consent to the raising up of the bodies and Paradise and that it contains eatables."

I (Ibn Taimiyyah) say, explaining away the Scales and the Bridge, and Punishment of the Grave, and the Hearing and the Seeing is the saying of the Mu'tazilah of Baghdad and not those of Basrah.

Aboo Haamid says, "The philosophers go even further and explain away all that is narrated about the Hereafter explaining it to refer to states of the mind and soul and 'tastes' of the mind." Till he says, "And they are the ones who go too far in interpreting, and the correct limit for interpreting is between the two and it is fine and obscure. None can reach it except those guided to it, who understand matters due to divine light, not due to what they hear [narrationsj. Then the way to the secrets of the affairs are revealed to them and they look at what is reported and its wordings, then that which they see with the light of certainty they accept, and that which goes against it, they interpret it. As for the one who takes all those matters from that which is narrated, then they cannot put a foot forward."

I (Ibn Taimiyyah) say, this talk means that nothing is to be gained from the narrations from the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) about affairs of knowledge, but rather every person reaches that with what he attains of divine insight and light and hidden knowledge! These are two principles of apostasy since every possessor of 'illumination' if he does not weigh it according to the Book and the Sunnah then he enters into misguidance."

He (Ibn Taimiyyah) also says in "Dar-ut-Ta'aarud [7/ 149]" after having quoted at length from "al-IHyaa'" and refuted it, adding:

"Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazaalee) does not have the knowledge of the Prophetic narrations and those from the Salaf which the scholars of them do, and they distinguish between the authentic and the weak. Therefore he quotes in his book fabricated aHaadeeth and plain lies, which if he knew that they were concocted, he would not quote."

He (Ibn Taimiyyah) (raHimahullaah) says in Majmoo' uI-Fataawaa [17/362]" where he talks about the names of ALIaah and His attributes, the sayings of the philosophers:

"Aboo Haamid mentions in "al-IHyaa"' the saying of those philosophers who interpret away that they went too far in their interpretation, and that the Hanbalees went too far in sticking to the textual wording, and he quotes AHmad ibn Hanbal as saying that which he did not say. and he did not know what AHmad said, nor what others of the Salaf said about this, nor what occurs in the Qur'aan and the Hadeeth about it!"

(8) ADH-DHAHABEE

He says in "Siyar A'laam an-Nubalaa [19/339]":

"As for "al-IHyaa'", then it contains a large number of baseless aHaadeeth. There is much good in it if only it did not have in it the manners, ways and ascetism of the philosophers and misguided Sufis. We ask Allaah for beneficial knowledge. Do you know what is beneficial knowledge? It is that which the Qur'aan came with and was explained by the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) by his words and actions..."

Then he (adh-Dhahabee) says:

"Beware of the views of the worshipping philosophers, and the ways of the people of numbers, and the hunger of the monk, and the light- headedness of the companions of seclusion, since all good is in the following of the liberal and straight way. so would that they called upon Allaah for help - 0 Allaah guide us upon the Straight Path."

He (adh-Dhahabee) (raHimahullaah) says in "Meezaan ul-I'tidaal [1/431]" in the biography of al-Haarith al Mahaasibee after having quoted Aboo Zur'ah's forbiddance of the reading of al-Haarith's books:

'Then what would be the case if he saw the works of Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee) at-Toosee about that? Since "al-IHyaa'" quotes so many fabricated narrations!"

(9) TAAJUD-DEEN AS-SUBKEE (d.771H)

He says in "Tabaqaat ush-Shaafi'iyyah [4/1451" in the biography of aI-Ghazzaalee:

"In this chapter I have gathered all that occurs in "al-IHyaa'" as regards aHadeeth for which I can find no isnaad (chain of transmitters)"

The collector of this book then said:

"Then he quoted and I counted around 943 aHaadeeth, but as for that which has an isnaad but is however, weak or fabricated, then it would perhaps reach many times that number as well."

As-Subkee said [4/127] in replying to the criticisms of at-Turtooshee and al-Maazaree to "al-IHyaa'":

"And as for the criticism that some of the aHaadeeth of "al-IHyaa'" are weak/baseless, then it is well known that al-Ghazzaalee was not fully competent therein, and most of the narrations and reports in Mal-IHyaa'" were scattered throughout the books of the scholars of Flqh and the Sufis, and he did not bring the chain of narrations for a single Hadeeth...". [Al-Aloosee says in "Ghaayatul Amaanee [2/268]": "Then as-Subkee replied to some of the criticisms of abMaazaree and at-Turtooshee with answers which were inaccurate as is his habit in blindly supporting the people of his madhhab, and even so he was not able to deny al-Ghazaalee's ignorance of Hadeeth].

(10) IBN KATHEER

He says in "al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah [12/174]" about al-Ghazzaalee:

"And in this period he wrote his book "IHyaa 'Uloom ud-Deen" and it is an amazing book containing many of the branches of the knowledge of the Sharee'ah, and mixed with it are some agreeable things from Sufism and actions of the heart. However, it contains many aHaadeeth unheard of, and those which are weak and contradict authentic ones as well as fabricated aHaadeeth, just as there are in other books about those, used as evidence for things which are Halaal or Haraam; and the book which is written for softening the hearts and for inciting to good and inspiring fear of the evil, then their matter is easier compared to other books.

Abul-Faraj ibn al-Jauzee, and then Ibn us-Salaah denounced him very strongly, and al-Maazaree wanted his book to be burnt, and likewise did the people in the West, and they said, "This book is a revival of the knowledge of his Deen. However, for our Deen, then its revival is that of its knowledge in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger", as I have reported in his biography in "at-Tabaqaat". Ibn Shukr declared many parts of "IHyaa''Uloom ud-Deen" to consist of false reports and he showed their falsity in a useful book, and al-Ghazzaalee used to say, "I have only a small stock regarding Hadeeth..."."

(11) ABUL 'ABBAAS AL QABBAAB (d.779H)

He said within his reply to a question about Suflsm and its ways:

"I have not ceased to hope that Allaah would send. some people who have good knowledge and know about this way, that they would abridge the book 'al-lHyaa', since it is a book which has collected many branches of knowledge for which there is a need and are not found in other than it. Particularly those hidden things and preoccupying things which destroy actions, and knowledge of weaknesses of the soul and how to cure them - and so about that it is something to be desired.

However, it is polluted by his using aHaadeeth which are weak in their chains of narration which will harm the ignorant when he meets Allaah, because he believes that all of it is correct, having nothing wrong!

The most serious of these in my view is that he has filled it with talk concerning 'inspired' knowledge, which is what ash-Shaikh Aboo MuHammad Fishtaalee called 'hidden knowledge', since it contains things whose seriousness is hidden from many, and because most of them are hidden, it will not harm the general masses to hear them since they will not be able to understand them."' [al-Mi'yaar al Maghrib (11/122] of al-Wanshareesee].

(12) SAALIH IBN MAHDEE AL-MAOBALEE (d. 1108H)

He says in "al-AbHaath al-Musaddadah fee Funoon Muta'addidah [p.412]":

"Ibn 'Abbaas says in the long Hadeeth reported by al-Bukhaaree and Muslim about the Khilaafah that 'Umar promised to speak when he first stood to speak in al-Madeenah. He said, when it was the day of Jumu'ah, the people hurried to go out after the sun had risen. Ibn 'Abbaas regarded that as being extremely early, and there is nothing reported authentically from the Salaf about going out (for Jumu'ah) earlier than that. So do not be misled by that which al-Ghazzaalee and his like rave about regarding going out (for Jumu'ah) during the night or on the day before (Yaum al-Khamees i.e.. Thursday)."' [We mention as a sideline what al-Muqbilee also said in "al 'Alam ush- Shaamikh [p.400]" that he saw the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) in a dream and that he angrily forbade him from his preoccupation with al-Ghazzaalee's book "al-IHyaa" and asking him, "Have I not informed you of the guidance?"].

13) 'ABDUL-LATEEF AL-HANBALEE (d. 1297H)'

[His biography is found in "Mu'jam al-Mu'allafeen [6/11]" and the text of his saying is to be found in "ad-Durar as-Sunniyyah [2/345]", and see the statements of the offspring of ash-Shaikh MuHammad ibn 'Abdul-Wahaab (raHimahullaah) in "ad-Durar [2/170]".

He said in a letter which he sent to some of his brothers who read "al-IHyaa'" and read it to various people from among the general public and to others:

"You have caused them to hear what "al-IHyaa'" contains of the deviated distortions and misguided corrupt interpretations, and ramblings containing mortal poison, and philosophy(!) about the basis of the Deen! Allaah ta'aalaa has made it obligatory to follow His Messengers and to cling to the way of the believers and there is no establishment of Islaam without this firm foundation.

In "al-IHyaa'" he followed the way of the philosophers and the people of rhetoric in many of the matters pertaining to divinity and that upon which the Deen is based. He clothed philosophy with the bark (clothing) of the Sharee'ah until the gullible and ignorant thought them to be truths from the Deen with which the Messengers came and the Books were sent down so that the people entered Islaam because of it, but in reality it is pure evil-smelling philosophy which the scholars know, and all those who follow the way of the people of knowledge in the cities and lands would spit at it.

The people of knowledge and insight have warned against looking into it, or approaching its hidden or manifest things. Further, some of the scholars of the west who were knowledgeable of the Sunnah ordered it to be burnt and many of them called it 'Imaatat 'Uloom ud-Deen' (Killing of the Knowledge of the Deen). Ibn 'Aqeel stood up strongly in censuring and denouncing it and in revealing its weaknesses and follies, and asserted that many of its subjects were pure heresy (atheistic), because of which the actions of a person who believes in that would not be accepted (by Allaah)."

(14) MAHMOOD SHUKREE AL AALOOSEE (d. 1342H)

He reported a large number of talks of some of the scholars about al-Ghazzaalee and his book "al-IHyaa'" in "Ghaayat ul-Amaanee [2/370-371]", then added in conclusion:

'This place is not wide enough for the talk about Aboo Haamid and the criticisms of him, and what we have mentioned is sufficient.' [Reported by al Aaloosee in "Ghayat ul Amaance [2/369.370]".

What is surprising is that some of the ignorants who claim to possess knowledge and righteousness -and he lacks both of them- dress themselves up in their clothes and has wrapped on his turban and let loose his beard, so that the unlearned one lacking in knowledge thinks him to be a Shaikh upon his chair wearing his turban. He finds a good market among the people because of what he gives them as regards admonition from lies and delusions and finds that there are no one to oppose him from those grazing animals, in the same way that a person who wishes may say what he likes among the graves (without fear of being contradicted), until as a consequence he became one of the prominent scholars, without it being known that he was more ignorant than a three day old baby!

Someone mentioned "IHyaa' 'Uloom ud-Deen" and greatly praised it and gave it all possible acclaim, so I said to him that it contains fabricated aHaadeeth, and questions of philosophy outside the Sharee'ah, and opinions totally against the Prophet's Sunnah, because of which the scholars who are trusted regarding their knowledge do not give the book any weight, to the extent that some of them have written books explaining the state of the aHaadeeth in it. So he looked at me mistrustingly and his wicked soul almost passed away and he said, "How can you say that when az-Zubaidee has written an explanation of it and checked the sources of its aHaadeeth and explained its secrets?" So I said to him, "Az-Zubaidee is not a scholar of this subject nor a man of this field, but rather he has some knowledge of the language and related fields, so that what he says about the sciences relating to reporting aHaadeeth is not given credence. Moreover, he was a fanatical grave- worshipper who called others to their bid'ah. When he heard that he turned away and departed and paid no attention to what I said, so I said, "The workers come to me from their mines; And it isn't my fault if the cattle don't understand."

The word of truth these days is very heavy upon the hearers, specially to the misguided and the innovators, so the upright today must be in accordance to the truth and follow the guidance."

(15) IBN HAMDAIN AL-QURTUBEE

He said:

Verily some of those who give warning and claim for themselves knowledge of Fiqh and then absolve themselves of it being in love with the Sharee'ah of al-Ghazzaalee and the sect of the Sufis, have published a paper calling for the blind acceptance of the book of Aboo Haamid (al-Ghazzaalee), the imaam of their innovation. So what does he (the author) say about his (al-Ghazzaalee's) objectionable and repulsive sayings and the misguiding writings which conflict with the Deen?
He (the author) claims that this knowledge is from the secret knowledge which they have about the secrets of divine lordship. Their 'knowledge' is such that no one uncovers its head, nor does anyone gain by achieving it, except he who walks towards it proudly, being indifferent to its misguidance. This has raised its own flag for them and set out its own rulings..." ["Siyar A'iaam an-Nuhalaa (19/332)"]

(16) IBN UL QATTAAN

He says in his book called "Nazm ul-Jumaan feemaa salafa min Akhbaariz- Zamaan" :

"...when "IHyaa' 'Uloom ud-Deen" reached Qurtubaa (Cordova) they spoke ill of it and disapproved of many things in it, specially their Qaadee (judge) Ibn Hamdain who did more than disapprove to the extent that he declared the disbelief of its author. He encouraged the Sultaan with that and used his scholars as evidence. So they agreed that it should be burnt. Thus 'Alee ibn Yusuf ordered that in accordance with their judgement and it was burnt in Qurtubaa by the west gate in the courtyard of the mosque after covering it with oil. A large group of prominent people were present during its burning and orders were sent out for it to be burnt throughout his territory. This burning continued throughout the land of Morocco in that time." ["al Mi'yaar al Maghrib (12/185)"]

(17) MUHAMMAD NAASIR UD-DEEN AL-ALBAANEE

He (hafizahullaah) says, in speaking of his copy of the book "al Mughnee 'an Haml il-Asfaar fil Asfaar fee takhreej maa fil IHyaa min Akhbaar', regarding his early life in seeking knowledge:

"I was much affected by it ("al-IHyaa"') in that which relates to behaviour, sincerity, keeping away from vanity, because of the chapters and sections which I read by Allaah's design and decree, during which I used to extract from it the aHaadeeth which al-Haafiz al 'Iraaqee supplied sources for and checked. That often lead me to read the chapter in which al-Ghazzaalee quoted those aHaadeeth, and so I greatly benefitted from that. However, all praise be to Allaah, I was not affected by his Sufism and his 'inspirations' and his interpretations which took him away from the position of the Salaf in many of the thoughts and beliefs, such as his denial of Allaah's ascension over the Throne, and his saying that Allaah imposes upon His servants that which they cannot bear, and similar things, which carried him away due to his immersion in metaphysics/rhetoric and the wanderings of the Sufis."

He (al-Albaanee) says in "Silsilatul A1-laadeetk ud-Da'eefah [1/18)":

"And how many aHaadeeth there are in "al-IHyaa'" which he asserts as coming from the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and about them al-Haafiz al-'Iraaqee and others say, "They have no basis!"

CONCLUSION

Some writers have mentioned the names of the books that have been written in refutation of or in annotation of or in order to give sources and checking of the aiiaadeeth of "al-IHyaa"', and so I will mention them without going into lengthy explanations.

1) Ibn al Munayyir al-Iskandaree wrote "ad-Diyaa al Mutalaalee fee ta'aqqub al-IHyaa' lil Ghazzaalee" mentioned by az-Zubaidee in "SharH al-IHyaa' [1/33]".

2) al-Haafiz al 'Iraaqee wrote three books of takhreej of "al-IHyaa"'.

a) Ikhbaar ul.-IHyaa bi Akhbaar ul-AHyaa: and it is a lengthy book.
b) al-Kashf al Mubeen 'an takhreej IHyaa' 'Uloomid -Deen.
c) al Mughnee 'an Haml ii Asfaar fil Asfaar fee takhreej maa fil IHyaa min Akhbaar : and it is abbreviated [It is well-known and printed along with "al-IHyaa"'] these three are mentioned by Ibn Fahd in "LaHz ul AlHaaz [p.230-231]".

3) al Haafiz ibn Hajr wrote "al Istidraak 'alaa takhreej "al-IHyaa'"" of his shaikh al 'Iraaqee mentioned by al Haafiz as-Sakhaawee in al-Jawahir wad-Durar [1532]".

4) al Haafiz al Qaasim ibn Qutloobughaa wrote "TuHfat ul AHyaa' feemaa faata mm takhreej il IHyaa'" mentioned by Haajee Khaleefah in "Kashf uz-Zunoon [1/24]".

5) Abul-Hasan ibn Sukkur wrote "IHyaa Mayyit A JHyaa fir-Radd 'alaa Kitaab il IHyaa".

6) Shaikh 'Abdul Haqq al 'Uthmaanee wrote "Tadhkiratul-Asfiyaa'm bitasfiyat-il-IHyaa'" : mentioned by Dr. Jameel AHmad in his book "Harakatut-Ta'leef billughatil 'Arabiyyah [p.425]".

7) Shaikh Taqee ud-Deen al Hisnee wrote "Takhreej AHaadeeth ul-IHyaa'": mentioned by as-Sakhaawee in "ad-Dau'ul-laaini [11/81]".

8) Our brother [...] 'Abdullaah as-Sabt has written a book particularly about the errors of "al-IHyaa'" which he indicated in his book "Soofiyaat Shaikh ul Azhar [p.43]".

Responce to The Above Article

Ibn al-Subki cited the following opinions from al-Ghazzali’s contemporaries:

Imam al-Haramayn: "Al-Ghazzali is a quenching sea."

Al-Ghazzali’s student Imam Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Mansur al-Naysaburi al-Shahid: "He is the second al-Shafi‘i."

As‘ad al-Mîhani:
"None attains the knowledge of al-Ghazzali’s science nor his merit except one who has attained or almost attained perfection in his intelligence."

Ibn al-Subki comments:

I like this verdict, for he who wishes to look into the level of one who is above him in knowledge, needs intelligence and understanding…. I heard the Shaykh and Imam [Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki] say: "None knows the rank of a person in knowl-edge except he who is his peer and has known him per-sonally, and he only knows him to the extent of what he himself was granted to know." He also used to say to us: "None of his companions knew al-Shafi‘i like al-Muzani knew him, and al-Muzani knew al-Shafi‘i only to the extent of al-Muzani’s strength. Nor can anyone estimate the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- as he deserves except Allah -- may He be exalted --, and each knows him -- Allah bless and greet him -- only to the extent of what he himself possesses. Thus the most knowledgeable in the Community about the Prophet’s -- Allah bless and greet him -- rank is Abu Bakr -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- because he was the best of the Umma, and Abu Bakr knows the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- only according to Abu Bakr’s strength."

As the foremost examplar of the Sufi Ash‘ari scholar of knowledge al-Ghazzali, like his teacher Abu al-Ma‘ali al-Juwayni and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, has attracted the faultfinding skills of latter-day critics of tasawwuf and Sunni doctrine as defined by Ash‘aris. Ibn Taymiyya peppered his discussions of al-Ghazzali with Ibn al-‘Arabi’s verdict – "Our master swallowed the seas of the philosophers in order to defeat them, but when he tried to throw them up he was unable" – and slighted al-Ghazzali’s Ihya’ as "containing both good and bad, but the good outweighs the
bad."

Burhan al-Din al-Biqa‘i (d. 885) attacked al-Ghazzali for saying "There is no possibility of anything more perfect than what exists."

Al-Suyuti refuted al-Biqa‘i’s insinuations in his epistle Tashdid al-Arkan fi Laysa fi al-Imkan Abda‘u Mimma Kan ("The Buttressing of the Pillars Concerning al-Ghazzali’s Saying ‘There is no possibility of anything more perfect than what exists’") and, after him, al-Haytami who states:

Al-Biqa‘i’s fanaticism led him to criticize the saying of al-Ghazzali the Proof of Islam, "There is no possibility of anything more perfect than what exists." He went vituperating him until people became disgusted. Then, one day, he went to visit one of the scholars of knowledge who was sitting somewhere alone. The latter took his slipper and began to hit al-Biqa‘i with it until he almost destroyed it, all the while scolding him and saying: "Are you the one who criticizes al-Ghazzali?! You are the one who says such-and-such about him?!" until some people came and delivered him, although no-one disapproved of the incident. Following this, the people of his time rallied against al-Biqa‘i and published many refutations against him in defense of al-Ghazzali.

The gist of their replies concerning al-Ghazzali’s statement is that when Allah’s will linked itself to the origination of this world and He originated it, ordaining the abiding of part of it to a set limit and that of its remainder indefinitely – meaning Paradise and Hellfire – this precluded the linkage (ta‘alluq) of divine power to the eradication (i‘dâm) of the entirety of this world. For divine power is not linked except to the possible, while the eradication of the entirety of this world is not possible – not ontologically (li dhâtih) but because of the aforementioned linkage. Since its eradication is excluded according to what we said, it follows that its origination in the first place was the apex of wisdom and completion, and the most perfect of all that can possibly be created, for, as concluded above, there is none other in existence.

Al-Ghazzali’s Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din ranks as one of the most widely read books in Islam, having earned the praise of the scholars and the general acceptance of the Community. Among those who praised it:

- Ibn al-Subki: "It ranks among the books which Muslims must look after and spread far and wide so that many people may be guided by reading them. Seldom has someone looked into this book except he woke up on the spot thanks to it. May Allah grant us insight that shows us the way to truth, and protect us from what stands between us and the truth as a veil."

- Al-Safadi: "It is among the noblest and greatest of books, to the extent that it was said, concerning it, that if all books of Islam were lost except the Ihya’, it would suffice for what was lost."

- Fakhr al-Din al-Razi: "It was as if Allah gathered all sciences under a dome, and showed them to al-Ghazzali."

The Ihya’ was also strongly criticized for a variety of reasons, among them the number of weak or forged narrations cited in it, a list of which is provided by Ibn al-Subki, who stressed that al-Ghazzali never excelled in the field of hadith. Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Maziri al-Maliki said in al-Kashf wa al-Inba’ ‘an Kitab al-Ihya’ that most of the narrations cited in it were flimsy (wâhin) with regard to authenicity, while the Maliki censor Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Walid al-Turtushi (d. 420) exclaimed in his epistle to Ibn Zafir – Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Atiyya: "He has crammed his book full with forgeries." Ibn al-Subki replied:

"Al-Maziri was a passionate champion of al-Ash‘ari’s positions – both the authoritative, the modest, the great, and the small – declaring an innovator anyone who went beyond them in the least. In addition to this he was a Maliki with a strong bias for his school, which he de-fended strenuously. On the other hand, al-Juwayni and al-Ghazzali reached a level of expertise and knowledge which every impartial ob-server can acknowledge as unmatched by anyone after them, and where they may have seen fit to contradict Abu al-Hasan [al-Ash‘ari] in questions of kalâm. Ash‘aris, particularly the Moroccans, do not take kindly to this nor allow anyone to contravene Abu al-Hasan in the least. Further complicating matters is al-Juwayni and al-Ghazzali’s weakening of Imam Malik’s position on certain points, such as rulings inferred from public welfare or the favoring of a certain school over another. … As for al-Maziri’s saying: "al-Ghazzali was not a foremost expert (mutabahhir) in the science of kalâm," I agree with him on this, but I add: He certainly had a firm foothold in it, even if, in my opinion, it did not match his foothold in other sciences. As for al-Maziri’s saying: "He engaged in philosophy before he became an expert in the science of principles," this is not the case. He did not look into philosophy except after he had become an expert in the science of usûl, and he indicated this in his book al-Munqidh min al-Dalal, adding that he involved himself in the science of kalâm before turning to philosophy. … As for Ibn Sina, al-Ghazzali declares him a disbeliever – how then could he possibly rely on him? … As for his blame of the Ihya’ for al-Ghazzali’s indulgence in some narrations: it is known that the latter did not have skill in the hadith, and that most of the narrations and stories of the Ihya ’ are taken from his predecessors among the Sufis and jurists. The man himself did not provide a single isnad, but one of our companions [Zayn al-Din al-‘Iraqi] took care to document the narrations of the Ihya’, and only a small amount were declared aberrant or anomalous (shâdhdh). I shall cite them for the sake of benefit ... Nor is al-Ghazzali’s phrasing "the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- said" meant as a definitive attribution to him but only as an attribution that appears definite. For if he were not assuming it true, he would not say it. The matter was not as he thought, and that is all. As for al-Turtushi’s statement concerning the forgeries found in the Ihya’, then – I ask you – is al-Ghazzali the one who forged them so that he may be bla-med for them? To blame him for them is certainly nothing more than inane fanaticism. It is an attack which no serious examiner can accept. " End of Ibn al-Subki's words from Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra.

Ibn al-Jawzi – a detractor of Sufis – similarly dismisses the Ihya’ in four of his works: I‘lam al-Ahya’ bi Aghlat al-Ihya’ ("Informing the Living of the Mistakes of the Ihya’), Talbis Iblis, Kitab al-Qussas, and his history al-Muntazam fi Tarikh al-Muluk wal-Umam. His views influenced Ibn Taymiyya and others. The basis of their position was also that al-Ghazzali used too many weak or baseless hadiths.

Other moderate hadith masters documented almost every single hadith in the Ihya’ without questioning its usefulness as a whole, accepting its immense standing among Muslims and contributing to its embellishment and spread as a manual for spiritual progress. Among these scholars:

- Zayn al-Din al-‘Iraqi (d. 806): al-Mughni ‘an Haml al-Asfar;

- His student Ibn Hajar: al-Istidrak ‘ala Takhrij Ahadith al-Ihya;

- al-Qasim ibn Qatlubagha al-Hanafi: Tuhfa al-Ahya’ fi ma Fata Min Takhrij Ahadith al-Ihya’;

- Sayyid Murtada al-Zabidi al-Husayni (d. 1205): Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin fi Sharh Asrar Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din in ten massive volumes, each scholar completing the previous scholar’s documentation.

More importantly, the majority of hadith masters hold it permissible to use weak hadiths in other than the derivation of legal rulings, such as in the encouragement to good and discouragement from evil (al-targhîb wa al-tarhîb), as countless hadith masters have indicated as well as other scholars, such as Imam al-Safadi. It must be under-stood that al-Ghazzali incorporated all the material which he judged of use to his didactic purposes on the bases of content rather than origin or chain of transmis-sion; that most of the Ihya’ consists in quotations from Qur’an, hadith, and the sayings of other than Ghazali, his own prose accounting for less than 35 of the work; and that three quarters of the huge number of hadiths cited are authentic in origin.

The Hanafi hadith master Murtada al-Zabidi began his great commentary on the Ihya’ with an explanation that al-Ghazzali’s method of hadith citation by conveying the general meaning without ascertaining the exact wording, had a basis in the practice of the Companions and Salaf:

"The verification of the wording of narrations was not an obligation for al-Ghazzali – may Allah have mercy on him! He would convey the general meaning, conscious of the different significations of the words and their mutual conflict with one another avoiding what would consti-tute interpolation or arbitrary rendering of one term with an-other.

"A number of the Companions have permitted the conveyance of Pro-phetic hadiths in their meanings rather than their wordings. Among them: ‘Ali, Ibn ‘Abbas, Anas ibn Malik, Abu al-Darda’, Wathila ibn al-Asqa‘, and Abu Hurayra – may Allah be well-pleased with them! Also, a greater number of the Successors, among them: the Imam of imams al-Hasan al-Basri, al-Sha‘bi, ‘Amr ibn Dinar, Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, Mujahid, and ‘Ikrima…. Ibn Sirin said: "I would hear a hadith from ten different people, the meaning reamining one but the wordings differing." Similarly, the Companions’ wordings in their narrations from the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- have differed one from another. Some of them, for example, will narrate a complete version; others will narrate the gist of the meaning; others will narrate an abridged version; others yet replace certain words with their synonyms, deeming that they have consider-able leeway as long as they do not contradict the original meaning. None of them intends a lie, and all of them aim for truthfulness and the report of what he has heard: that is why they had leeway. They used to say: "Mendacity is only when one deliberately intends to lie."

"‘Imran ibn Muslim [al-Qasir] narrated that a man said to al-Hasan [al-Basri]: "O Abu Sa‘id! When you narrate a hadith you put it in better and more eloquent terms than when one of us narrates it." He replied: "There is no harm in that as long as you have fully expressed its meaning." Al-Nadr ibn Shumayl (d. 208) said: "Hushaym (d. 183) used to make a lot of mistakes in Arabic, so I adorned his narrations for you with a fine garment" – meaning, he arabized it, since al-Nadr was a philologist (nahwî). Sufyan [al-Thawri] used to say: "When you see a man show strictness in the wordings of hadith, know that he is advertising himself." He narrated that a certain man began to question Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan (d. 198) about a specific wording inside a hadith. Yahya said to him: "O So-and-so! There is not in the whole world anything more sublime than Allah’s Book, yet He has permitted that its words be recited in seven different dialects. So do not be so strict!"

"In the hadith master al-Suyuti’s commentary on [al-Nawawi’s] al-Taqrib, in the fourth part of the twenty-sixth heading, the gist of what he said is as follows:

"If a narrator is not an expert in the wordings and in what shifts their meanings to something else, there is no permission for him to narrate what he has heard in terms of meaning only. There is no disagreement concerning this. He must relate the exact wording he has heard. If he is an expert in the matter, [opinions have differed:] a large group of the experts of hadith, fiqh, and usûl said that it is not permitted for him to narrate in other than the exact same words. This is the position of Ibn Sirin, Tha‘lab, and Abu Bakr al-Razi the Hanafi scholar. It is also narrated as Ibn ‘Umar’s position. But the vast majority of the Salaf and Khalaf from the various groups, among them the Four Imams, permit narration in terms of meaning in all the above cases provided one adduces the meaning. This dispensation is witnessed to by the practice of the Companions and Salaf, and shown by their narrating a single report in different wordings.

"There is a hadith of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- relevant to the issue narrated by Ibn Mandah in Ma‘rifa al-Sahaba and al-Tabarani in al-Kabir from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sulayman ibn Aktham al-Laythi [= ‘Abd Allah ibn Sulaym ibn Ukayma] who said: "I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! Verily, when I hear a hadith from you I am unable to narrate it again just as I heard it from you.’" That is, he adds or omits something. The Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- replied: "As long as you do not make licit the illicit or make illicit the licit, and as long as you adduce the meaning, there is no harm in that." When this was mentioned to al-Hasan he said: "Were it not for this, we would never narrate anything."

"Al-Shafi‘i adduced as his proof [for the same position] the hadith "The Qur’an was revealed in seven dialects."

"Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Makhul that he and Abu al-Azhar went to see Wathila [or Wa’ila] ibn al-Asqa‘ and said to him: "Narrate to us a hadith of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- in which there is no omission, no addition, and nothing forgotten." He replied: "Has any of you recited anything from the Qur’an?" (*) They said: "Yes, but we have not memorized it very well. We sometimes add ‘and’ or the letter alif, or omit something." He said: "If you cannot memorize the Qur’an which is written down before you, adding and omitting some-thing from it, then how about narrations which we heard from the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him --, some of them only once? Suffice yourself, when-ever we narrate them to you, with the general meaning!" He narrated something similar from Jabir ibn ‘Abd Allah in al-Madkhal: "Hudhayfa said to us: ‘We are Beduin Arabs, we may cite a saying without its proper order.’" He also narrated from Shu‘ayb ibn al-Hajjab: "I visited al-Hasan together with ‘Abdan. We said to him: ‘O Abu Sa‘id! Someone may narrate a hadith in which he adds or from which he omits something.’ He replied: ‘Lying is only when someone deliberately intends this.’" … [He also narrated something similar from Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, al-Sha‘bi, al-Zuhri, Sufyan, ‘Amr ibn Dinar, and Waki‘.] " End of al-Suyuti’ s words from Tadrib al-Rawi as quoted by al-Zabidi, and end of al-Zabidi’s excerpt from Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin.

(*) In al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi’s version in Nawadir al-Usul (p. 389) Makhul asks: "Has any of you stood in prayer at length at night?"

The Imams of hadith are unanimous in accepting the narration in meaning only on condition that the narrator has mastered the Arabic language and his narration does not constitute an aberration or anomaly (shudhûdh), among other conditions. Al-Zabidi’s documentation of the majority position that it is permissible to narrate the hadiths of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- in their meanings rather than their wordings is also the position of Ibn al-Salah in his Muqaddima, but the latter avers that the dispensation no longer applies at a time when the hadiths are available to all in published books. Shaykh Nur al-Din ‘Itr adopts this latter position: "The last word on this subject is to prohibit hadith narration in the sense of meaning only, because the narrations have all been compiled in the manuals of hadith, eliminating the need for such a dispensation."

A generation after al-Ghazzali’s death, the Ihya’ was burnt in Andalus upon the recommendation of the qadi Ibn Hamdayn who was named Commander of the Believers in Qurtuba in 539 then fled to Malaga where he died in 548. Shortly thereafter, the Moroccans rehabilitated the book as stated by Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki – in a long poem that begins with the words "Abu Hamid! You are truly the one that deserves praise." Ibn al-Subki narrated with his chain from Abu al-Hasan al-Shadhili that Ibn Hirzahm, one of the Moroccan shaykhs who had intended the burning of the book, saw the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- in his dream commending the book before al-Ghazzali and ordering that Ibn Hirzahm be lashed for slander. After five lashes he was pardoned and woke up in pain, bearing the traces of the lashing. After this he took to praising the book from cover to cover.

Another rallying-cry of the critics of the Ihya’ is that it contains no exhortation towards jihad and that its author remained in seclusion between the years 488-499, at a time when the Crusaders ravaged the Antioch and al-Qudus, killing Muslims by the tens of thousands. Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi replied to these insinuations with the following words:

The great Imam’s excuse may be that his most pressing engagement was the reform of his own self first, and that it is one’s personal corruption which paves the way for external invasions, as indicated by the beginning of Sura al-Isra’. The Israelites, whenever they became corrupt and spread corruption in the earth, were subjected to the domination of their enemies. But whenever they did good and reformed themselves and others, they again held sway over their enemies. He directed his greatest concern toward the reform of the individual, who constitutes the core of the society. The reform of the individual can be effected only through the reform of his heart and thought. Only through such reform can his works and behavior be improved, and his entire life. This is the basis of societal change to which the Qur’ an directs us by saying "Lo! Allah changes not the condition of a folk until they (first) change that which is in their hearts" (13:11).

Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki said about the detractors of the Ihya’:

I consider them similar to a group of pious and devoted men who saw a great knight issue from the ranks of the Muslims and enter the fray of their enemies, striking and battling until he subdued them and unnerved them, breaking their ranks and routing them. Then he emer-ged covered with their blood, went to wash himself, and entered the place of prayer with the Muslims. But that group thought that he still had some of their blood on his person, and they criticized him for it.

Among the most famous commentaries of the Ihya’:

- The hadith master Murtada al-Zabidi’s ten-volume Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin Sharh Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din ("The Lavish Gift of the Godwary Masters: Commentary on al-Ghazzali’s ‘Giving Life to the Religious Sciences’") which contains the most comprehensive documentation of the hadith narrations cited by al-Ghazzali.

- ‘Abd al-Qadir ibn ‘Abd Allah al-‘Aydarus Ba ‘Alawi’s Ta‘rif al-Ahya bi Fada’il al-Ihya ("The Appraisal of the Living of the Immense Merits of the Ihya").

- Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari’s Sharh ‘Ayn al-‘Ilm wa Zayn al-Hilm ("The Spring of Knowledge and the Adornment of Understanding") on the abridged version. Al-Qari begins it by stating:

"I wrote this commentary on the abridgment of Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din by the Proof of Islam and the Confirmation of Creatures hoping to receive some of the outpouring of blessings from the words of the most pure knowers of Allah, and to benefit from the gifts that exude from the pages of the Shaykhs and the Saints, so that I may be mentioned in their number and raised in their throng, even if I fell short in their fol-lowing and their service, for I rely on my love for them and content myself with my longing for them."

End of biographical notice on Hujjatul Islam al-Ghazzali by Hj. Gibril --

Allah forgive him! -- written out of duty and love, not arrogance. Main source: Ibn al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra ( 6:191-389 #694).

O Allah! bring us out of the darkness of illusion into the light of knowledge, adorn our manners with gentleness, and grant us deeds that are accepted in Your Presence. Glory to You! Truly we know nothing except what You teach us.

O Allah! benefit us with the Proof of Your Religion, Imam al-Ghazzali, and thank him on behalf of Muhammad's Community -- upon him Your blessings and peace.

Allah's blessings and peace upon the best of prophets and messengers, our master Muhammad, and upon his Family and all his Companions. Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds.

Those Who Criticize

Today’s “Salafis” have revived a particularly bad trait of some naysayers of the past, which consists in attacking Imam Ghazali and belittling those who read his works and cite them to illustrate their opinions. This concerns especially his major book Ihya’ `Ulum al-Din, because it is a landmark of tasawwuf whose immense success and readership the enemies of tasawwuf find particularly galling. Some go so far as to claim that Ghazali was mad when he wrote it, others misconstrue Ghazali’s deathbed reading of Imam Bukhari as a renunciation of tasawwuf, others yet bring up the condemnations of the book by a handful of scholars known for their anti-sufi bias. Yet Allah has allowed the book to tower high above the clamor of its few detractors, and its translations keep increasing in number and quality. The following is intended to provide readers with reliable references concerning his life and works so as to protect ourselves, with Allah’s help, against the slurs of ignorance and envy.

Salah al-Din al-Safadi (d. 764), Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi’s student, relates in his great biographical dictionary entitled al-Wafi — which contains over 14,000 biographies:

Muhammad b. Muhammad b. Muhammad b. Ahmad, the Proof of Islam, the Ornament of the Faith, Abu Hamid al-Tusi (al-Ghazali), the Shafi`i jurist, was in his later years without rival.

In 488 he gave up the entirety of his worldly estate (and his professorship at the Nizamiyya, where he had taught since 484) and followed the way of renunciation and solitude. He made the Pilgrimage, and, upon his return, directed his steps to Syria, where he abided a while in the city of Damascus, giving instruction in the mosque retreat (zawiyat al-jami`) which now bears his name in the Western quarter. He then voyaged to Jerusalem, exerting himself greatly in worship and in visiting the holy sites and places. Next he travelled to Egypt, remaining for a while at Alexandria…

He returned to his native city of Tus (shortly before 492). Here he compiled a number of valuable books [among them the Ihya’] before returning to Nisabur, where he was obliged to give lessons at the Nizamiyya (499). He subsequently forsook this and made his way back to his home city, where he assumed the directorship of a retreat (khaniqah) for the Sufis and that of a neighboring college for those occupied with learning. He divided his time among good works such as reciting through the Qur’an and holding lessons for the People of Hearts (the Sufis)…

It is among the noblest and greatest of books, to the extent that it was said concerning it: If all books of Islam were lost except the Ihya’, it would suffice for what was lost… They disapproved of him for including in it hadiths which were not established to be authentic, but such inclusion is permitted in works of encouraging good and discouraging evil (al-targhib wa al- tarhib). The book remains extremely valuable. Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi used to say: “It was as if Allah gathered all sciences under a dome, and showed them to al-Ghazali,” or something to this effect. He passed away… in 505 at Tabaran… the citadel of Tus, where he was interred.(1)

The above clearly refutes the fabrication by some that Ghazali disavowed tasawwuf towards the end of his life. Let us turn to the fabrication of those who try to separate between the Ghazali of usul al- fiqh and the Ghazali of tasawwuf. When they are told that Imam Ghazali’s books on the methodology and foundations of Islamic law are considered required reading in the field — such as his Mustasfa and Mankhul and Shifa’ al-ghalil — they say that he wrote them before his period of seclusion during which he adopted tasawwuf. In reality, the greatest and most comprehensive of the four books he wrote on Usul al-fiqh (Principles of law) was composed in the last period of his life as stated by Dr. Taha al-`Alwani in his book Usul al-fiqh al-islami:

Al Imam al-Ghazali’s Encyclopedia of Shari`a Source Methodology, his fourth book on the subject, and his last word, was al- Mustasfa, which has been printed several times in Egypt and elsewhere. Indeed, this is the work he wrote after coming out of his period of meditation and seclusion.(2)

3.      The notice on Ghazali in the Reliance states:

In Damascus he lived in seclusion for some ten years, engaged in spiritual struggle and the remembrance of Allah, at the end of which he emerged to produce his masterpiece Ihya’ `Ulum al-Din [Giving Life to the Religious Sciences], a classic among the books of the Muslims about internalizing godfearingness (taqwa) in one’s dealings with Allah, illuminating the soul through obedience to Him, and the levels of believers’ attainment therein. The work shows how deeply Ghazali personally realized what he wrote about, and his masterly treatment of hundreds of questions dealing with the inner life that no-one had previously discussed or solved is a performance of sustained excellence that shows its author’s well- disciplined intellect and profound appreciation of human psychology. He also wrote nearly two hundred other works, on the theory of government, Sacred Law, refutations of philosophers, tenets of faith, Sufism, Koranic exegesis, scholastic theology, and bases of Islamic jurisprudence.(3)

What about Ghazali’s scholarly critics?

The most vocal, Ibn al- Jawzi — a detractor of Sufis — dismisses the Ihya’ in four of his works: I`lam al-ahya’ bi aghlat al-Ihya’ (Informing the living about the mistakes of the Ihya’), Talbis Iblis, Kitab al-qussas,(4)  and his history al-Muntazam fi tarikh al-muluk wal-umam.(5) His views influenced Ibn Taymiyya and his student Dhahabi. The basis of their position was Ghazali’s use of weak hadiths, a list of which is provided by Taj al-Din al-Subki in his Tabaqat. Is their criticism justified or an exaggeration? Most likely the latter, in view of the fact that both the hafiz al-`Iraqi (d. 806) and the hafiz al-Zabidi (d. 1205) after him documented every single hadith in the Ihya and never questioned its usefulness as a whole. Rather, they accepted its immense standing among Muslims and contributed to its embellishment and spread as a manual for spiritual progress. As Subki stressed, Ghazali never excelled in the field of hadith.(6)

More importantly, the majority of hadith masters hold it permissible to use weak hadiths in other than the derivation of legal rulings, such as in the encouragement to good and discouragement from evil (al-targhib wa al-tarhib), as countless hadith masters have indicated as well as other scholars, such as al-Safadi himself.(7) It must be understood that Ghazali incorporated all the material which he judged of use to his didactic purposes on the bases of content rather than origin or chain of transmission; that most of the Ihya consists in quotations from Qur’an, hadith, and the sayings of other than Ghazali, his own prose accounting for less than 35% of the work;(8) and that most of the huge number of hadiths cited are authentic in origin.

In conclusion, we say as al-Safadi that the Ihya’ ranks as a work of targhib or ethics, which is the principal business of tasawwuf. Criteria of authenticity for evidence cited in such works are less rigorous than for works of `aqida and fiqh according to the majority of the scholars, as the next section shows. To hold works of tasawwuf to the criteria of the latter works is to blame apples for not being oranges. Consequently, as al-Safadi correctly indicated, the criticism of Ihya’ `ulum al-din by some on the basis of weak hadiths does not stand, nor does similar criticim of like works, for example Dhahabi’s criticism of Abu Talik al-Makki’s Qut al-qulub and others. Those who cling to such criticism while ignoring the massive endorsement of tasawwuf and its books by the Muslim scholars cling to their own prejudice rather than sound knowledge. Our advice to these brethren is:

We remind you of al-Dhahabi’s advice in his biographical notice on Ibn all-Farid in Mizan al-i`tidal: “Do not hasten to judge, rather, keep the best opinion of Sufis”;(9) of Imam Ghazali’s advice in al-Munqidh min al-dalal: “Think good thoughts (about Sufis) and do not harbor doubts in your heart”;(10) and of Ibn Hajar al-Haytami’s fatwa concerning critics of those who respect tasawwuf and believe in awliya’: “Bad thoughts about them (Sufis) is the death of the heart.”(11) Take the great good that is in each of the works of the Sufis in the proper manner, respect the masters of tasawwuf, the least among whom towers high above you in knowledge, do not search out the disagreements of scholars, and stick to humbleness and respect before those who speak about Allah from Whom comes all success.

Book Referrences

 (1) Salah al-Din Khalil ibn Aybak al-Safadi, al-Wafi bi al-wafayat (Wiesbaden, 1962-1984) 1:274-277 (#176).

(2) Taha Jaber al-`Alwani, Usul al-fiqh al-islami: Source Methodology in Islamic Jurisprudence, ed. Yusuf Talal DeLorenzo (Herndon, VA: IIIT, 1411/1990) p. 50.

(3) Reliance of the Traveller p. 1048.

(4) Ibn al-Jawzi, Kitab al-qussas wa al-mudhakkirin p. 201.

(5) Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Muntazam 9:169.

(6) Taqi al-Din al-Subki, Tabaqat al-shafi`iyya 4:179-182.

(7) See al-Hakim, al-madkhal li `ilm al-hadith” (beginning), al- Bayhaqi Dala’il al-nubuwwa (introduction), Nawawi, al-Tibyan fi `ulum al-qur’an p. 17. The latter says: “The scholars are in agreement on the legitimacy of using weak hadiths in the realm of virtous works.” Al- Sakhawi stated the view of the scholarly consensus on this question in the Epilogue of of his al-Qawl al-badi` fi al-salat `ala al-habib al- shafi` (The admirable doctrine concerning the invocation of blessings upon the beloved intercessor) (Beirut: dar al-kutub al-`ilmiyya, 1407/ 1987) p. 245-246.

(8) T.J. Winter, trans. Ghazali’s “Remembrance of Death” (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1989), Introduction, p. xxix n. 63.

(9) al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-i`tidal 3:214.

(10) al-Ghazali, al-Munqidh min al-dalal (Damascus 1956) p. 40.

(11) Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Fatawa hadithiyya (Cairo: al-Halabi, 1970) p. 331.

(12). Reproduced with permission from Shaykh M. Hisham Kabbani’s _The Repudiation of “Salafi” Innovations_ (Kazi, 1996) p. 326-330.

(13)Blessings and Peace on the Prophet, his Family, and his Companions

(14)GF Haddad [7 Sep 1996]

(15)Abu Bakar Aceh, Prof. Dr. Sejarah Filsafat Islam, Semarang, Raadhani, p. 135.

(16)Muhammad Luthfi Jum’ah, Tarikh Falasifatil Islam, Egypt, Najib Metri, p. 68.

(17).Abu Bakar Abdur Razak, Ma’al Ghazali, Cairo, Darul Qaumiyah, p. 50

(18) . DR. Sa’ad Mursa Ahmad, Tathawur Al-Fikry Al-Tarbawy, Mathaabi’ Sajlul, Arab, Al-Qahirah,   p. 283

[1] Abu Bakar Aceh, Prof. Dr. Sejarah Filsafat Islam, Semarang, Raadhani, p. 135.

[2] Muhammad Luthfi Jum’ah, Tarikh Falasifatil Islam, Egypt, Najib Metri, p. 68.

[3] Abu Bakar Abdur Razak, Ma’al Ghazali, Cairo, Darul Qaumiyah, p. 50.

[4] Muh. Luthfi Jum’ah, op.cit., p. 69.

[5] DR. Sa’ad Mursa Ahmad, Tathawur Al-Fikry Al-Tarbawy, Mathaabi’ Sajlul, Arab, Al-Qahirah,   p. 283 – 284

[6] Sa’ad Mursa Ahmad, Ibid., p.284.

https://rusmanhaji.wordpress.com/.../al-ghazalis-concept-and-those-who-crit...