Free Will and Predestination in Islamic Thought

Theoretical Compromises in the Works of Avicenna, al-Ghazali and Ibn 'Arabi

Maria De Cillis

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781317937036
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Free Will & Determinism in Philosophy

The subject of "human free-will" versus "divine predestination" is one of the most contentious topics in classical Islamic thought. By focusing on a theme of central importance to any philosophy of religion, and to Islam in particular, this book offers a critical study of the intellectual contributions offered to this discourse by three key medieval Islamic thinkers: Avicenna, al-Gh?z?l? and Ibn ?Arab?.

Through investigation of primary sources, Free Will and Predestination in Islamic Thought establishes the historical, political and intellectual circumstances which prompted Avicenna, al-Gh?z?l? and Ibn ?Arab?'s attempts at harmonization. By analysing the theoretical and linguistic 'techniques' which were employed to convey these endeavours, this book demonstrates that the three individuals were committed to compromise between philosophical, theological and mystical outlooks.

Arguing that the three scholars' treatments of the so-called qa?? wa'l-qadar (decree and destiny) and ikhtiy?r (free-will) issues were innovative, influential and fundamentally more complex than hitherto recognized, this book contributes to a fuller understanding of Islamic intellectual history and culture and will be useful to researchers interested in Islamic Studies, Religion and Islamic Mysticism.

1 Avicenna

Part one

Avicenna: a biography

Abū ‘Alī al-Husayn Ibn ‘Abd Allāh Ibn Sīnā, identified in the Western world as Avicenna, is arguably one of the most important and well-known thinkers of the entire Graeco-Arabic philosophical tradition. Often referred to by later Muslim philosophers as al-Shaykh al-ra’īs (the chief master), Avicenna has been extensively studied and many valuable scholarly contributions have been written about his life and works, shedding light on his character and role in the Islamic intellectual domain.¹ Here it will suffice to briefly mention a few aspects of his life which will enable the readers to familiarize themselves with one of the most influential philosophers of Islam.

Avicenna was born in 370/980 in a village near Bukhārā where he seems to have spent his youth. Son of an Ismā‘īlī, he was intended to be educated according to Ismā‘īlī doctrines.² At a very early age he was introduced to the sciences of the Aristotelian curriculum (logic, mathematics, physics and metaphysics) also studying jurisprudence under the direction of an obscure ascetic. By 385/996, Avicenna is engaged in medical practice; his intellectual independence joined to an extraordinary intelligence and memory allowed him to master all the then known sciences by the age of 18.³ At the age of 22, after the death of his father, Avicenna was forced to enter the government in order to earn a secure income, soon becoming appreciated and consulted on both medical and political matters. Having cured the son of Prince Ibn Mansūr al-Sām‘ānī of Bukhārā in 386/997, Avicenna was allowed to access the splendid royal library. In this period he seems to have composed The Compendium of the Soul and two lost works.⁴ After a brief stay at the court of Prince ‘Alī Ibn Ma‘mūn Khawārism in Jurjān, Avicenna was compelled to flee for political reasons, reaching the court of the Shaykh al-Ma‘ālī Qābūs, but finding him dead upon arrival (402/1012). On his return to Jurjān, Avicenna met al-Jūzjānī who was destined to become his lifelong disciple and the friend who completed the writing of Avicenna’s autobiography. During his long sojourn in Jurjān, Avicenna composed some of his major works, amongst which are the Kitāb al-Qānūn fī’l-ṭibb and the Kitāb al-Mabda’ wa’l-ma‘ād.⁵ Avicenna left Jurjān to reach Rayy in 405/1015, becoming politically involved in a dispute related to the young Prince Majid al-Dawla (d. 420/1029). Soon after, Avicenna left for Hamadhān where, as al-Jūzjānī reports, he started a new chapter of his life. Nominated vizier of the Prince Shams al-Dawla (d. 997/1021), Avicenna juggled between his daily political career and his philosophical writings to which he would dedicate himself at night. In this period he commenced the al-Shifā’ and also wrote the Kitāb al-Hidāya. On the death of the prince, Avicenna’s life took a bad turn as he was persecuted by his enemies and imprisoned for his alleged secret correspondence with rivals of the Hamadhān dynasty. During his captivity he composed the treatise Ḥayy Ibn Yaqẓān.⁶ Set free through a coup d’état, Avicenna escaped to Iṣfahān where he dedicated himself entirely to his philosophical interests producing the rest of his works in about 10 years. He completed the last part of al-Shifā’, the Kitāb al-Najāt, the Dānish nāma-i ‘alā’ī, The Eastern Philosophy now lost, al-Ishārāt wa’l-tanbīhāt, and a series of treatises including the Risālat fī’l-‘ishq, Risālat fī māhiyyat al-Ṣalāt and the Risālat al-Qadar.⁷ In Hamadān, during a military expedition led by the Prince ‘ Alā’ al-Dawla, Avicenna died of colic in 428/1037.

Aristotelian and Fārābīan influences

Alfred L. Ivry has pointed out that Avicenna’s view of free will and predestination is dependent on ‘a cluster of related concepts, [such as] potentiality, possibility, matter and evil, and above all upon the concept of the Necessity of existence’.⁸ Throughout this work, we shall endeavour to elucidate the meaning of the above notions, showing how they influenced Avicenna’s views on qaḍā’ wa’l-qadar and ikhtiyār.

There is no doubt that Avicenna was inspired by Greek philosophy. The two great luminaries of prime importance for him were Plato (d. 347 BC) and Aristotle. In contrast to the majority of the falāsifa who were convinced of a perfect harmony existing between these two major thinkers, a belief strengthened by the erroneous attribution to Aristotle of Neoplatonic writings, Avicenna was well aware of the discrepancies existing between them and attempted a reconciliation of the divergent tendencies built up during this time of philosophical history. The ‘Aristotelian’ tradition which Avicenna received and the Neoplatonic teachings he inherited were not mutually compatible. Incoherencies were due to the vicissitudes that the transmission of this tradition underwent both from Greek into Arabic (often through Syriac) and within Arabic intellectual history. Particularly, distortions due to textual corruption and errors in the attribution of certain works to their respective authors were quite common. The most famous case is that of the Plotinian Theologia Aristotelis which, attributed to Aristotle, led to a misinterpretation of his philosophy.⁹ Avicenna’s second master al-Fārābī (d. 292/950), Aristotle being the first, ‘enlightened’ his disciple on the real purpose of the Stagirite’s Metaphysics thus helping Avicenna to eliminate the additions of the Islamic tradition. Avicenna confessed to have been confused when he attempted to understand Aristotle’s Metaphysics, despite he had read it 40 times. More specifically, Avicenna encountered difficulties when he attempted to grasp the aim of the Stagirite’s work. Al-Fārābī’s work, On the Purpose of Metaphysics, provided an answer to Avicenna’s doubts. By pointing out the mistakes of assuming metaphysics and Islamic theology to be identical, a tendency initiated by al-Kindī, al-Fārābī specified that the primary objects of the metaphysical science (the study of the being-qua-being and its equivalent in universality, the One, as well as the theoretical enquiries into privation and multiplicity etc.), were to be differentiated from the subject-matter of theology, that is God.¹⁰ Unfortunately, this ‘cleansing’ process was only partial since al-Fārābī had already integrated Plotinus, masqueraded as Aristotle, into his philosophy, thus leading Avicenna to accept certain concepts apparently irreconcilable with Aristotle’s own metaphysics, such as the Plotinian doctrine of emanation.¹¹

Aristotle believed that causality was at the core of creation. He viewed creation as the product of a causal chain, with causes and effects being linked in a descending succession. According to the Stagirite, an efficient cause necessarily produces its effect and, even more specifically, once the sufficient cause exists the effect cannot be delayed. This theory made the effect coexist in time with its cause so that, Aristotle believed, the cause precedes its effect not in time but with respect to its capacity of attaining existence. This means that an efficient cause, which is higher in the succession of existents, is responsible for the existence of a lower object. Existence is therefore conceived as being bestowed downwards from one cause to its effect with the latter becoming, in turn, the cause for its following effect.¹²

Avicenna expands the Aristotelian system by elaborating a new ontological doctrine which, explanatory of the phenomena of creation, absorbs the Greek philosopher’s view of causality, but places it within the Neoplatonic emanative scheme based on the procession of immaterial intelligences from the Supreme Being by way of emanation. The notion of ‘emanation’ is amongst the most problematic concepts in philosophy; its complexity is due to the fact that, as Armstrong suggests, it has not got any precise philosophical meaning but it rather pertains to the domain of metaphor, as the classical image of the sun and the rays emanated from the luminous source demonstrates.¹³ Originally Stoic,¹⁴ the concept of emanation referred to a material overflowing of a luminous essence which was considered responsible for the generation of lower entities. Later in history, Neoplatonic thinkers endeavoured to prove that emanation, inten...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1. Avicenna: Part one
• 2. Avicenna: Part two
• 3. Al-Ghazālī: Part one
• 4. Al-Ghazālī: Part two
• 5. Ibn ‘Arabī: Part one
• 6. Ibn ‘Arabī: Part two
• Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index