Theodicy in Islamic Thought “BEST OF ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS” 3K Eric L. Ormsby PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS | | THE DISPUTE OVER AL-GHAZALI’S 1 3 } | PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY umiversity OF TOLEDO LIBRARIES= Preface Ta this work, I describe and analyze the major themes and arguments in longlved but litleaown debate among Mur lim theologians, My fst concern has ben to present these themes snd arguments as cearly and as acurately as 1 cou, and t do 40, as often a6 possible, to the words ofthe dspatats them. ‘elvet. This seemed espacilly important to me, since much of the material which Ihave used exits only in manuscript and 20 fs ot always easly accessb. Thave arranged the stody topically and have grouped the incl arguments around tres centr problems: divine power nd possi; divine will nd neces, sad divine etic and bligatin, In adopting this course, Thave followed «prosedare ‘fen sed bythe diputants themselves fn their trates. Thad Hest considerod ansyzing the debate from a hstorcal view- Doin, but it quickly became clear to me that such an approach ‘would be impracticable. The aguinents inthe debate were cx ‘molative; each dispotant built spon, and recapitulate, th at- tents of his predecessors. A chronolgial approach wold fave involved elther cotinal repetition and restatement ora ‘artow concentration on one or two stages ofthe debate. In my ‘pinion, eilher course would have misrepresented the sgn ‘canoe and potential interest of the debate a dieussing the arguments nthe debate, Uhave oxasionally Included reforeces to parallel auments and themes in West ‘ern discussions of theodiy. I did this bocause the subject may be ofinteres to students of helogy and philosophy beyond the specialized ares of Near Eastern tudes, However, 1 wo0ld not wat to obscure the fc that such references are often problen “They ace expecially inthe inten whore reference i made to pore ancient soutees—and spesflly, Stole sour forvii PREFACE. Tater Ilmle notions and concepts. While it seems undeniable that Moslin authors, ftom an early dat, had acess to Stoic thought (or certain poctions thereof, sil unclear by what ‘means, of in wht form, Stic ides came to them, The rane ‘ison of certain Stoic tatios to Musi plosphers and the Clogian i sll vesed question, Nevertheles, I fet that to ‘omit such oferencos to possible sources would have been, i is ‘own way, equally misesding, In any exe, these references, 35 ‘well a others to medieval Scholle and modern Western phi Tosophors, ae offered here mare in the itor of comparizn, nd a astanoes of pall formulations, thn out of any desire (o suggest, or floras proved, any direct transmission of dear coc compler of infvences. ‘The thea central problems of the dispute, which 1 treatin Chapters Thee through Fie below, represent quite complex nd sgninat constellations of problems within the contet of Idlanie-theolgy. Bach might warrant « separate and detailed luoatinent i i ow ight. My tnteret as boon to lar the (Gen tact) fester a rather intent and protracted lps, tnd 50 1 make no dai to oer here define discussions of "hese three problemt; rather, I ave tried to spproach them only 2 they had bearlag on the dispute ise would ike to thank sever individual who have helped me doring the longtime ic as taken ie to complete thi study. My teacher, mentor, and frend, the Inte Profesor Rudolf Mach, frst suggested this ope to me and made ealable the rlovant ‘Arabic manuscripts from the Prneaton University Librarys Car- ‘at and Yehuda Callotons He was always unalingly generous ‘wth his tne and with sgyestion fr the improvement ofthe ‘work. Tn adton, he allowed me. to so, and ite fom, Ne extensive lela les of Arabic technical tarninaogy; without ‘ese, certain sections ofthe work and espeally Chapter Thee, ‘would fave been dificult deed to write, Furthermore, at wy footnotes atest, he was most generous in suggesting farther oures chat have enriched the work. T have aio profited fom his presi and musnoed sent of langue, which hae iproved the ste ofthe workin many places My indebtedness o Rudolf ‘Mach can now never be repaid, but Ile this work, imperfect PREFACE, ® 2 it to the memory of an fcomparable sel and wacer hd a nagoasenous fend should alto tke to thank Professors Manfred Ullman and Josef van Esto the University of Tbingen, with whos Ts Jrvoged to sod and who tase bell tome inte easiy ager of is work {thank he Dever Aladentacher Aus tunis (DAAD) or sling this year of study psnble. lo gute to De Keanery 1, Woody my ed nf toe colleague atthe Prcston Univer Library. and to Pro [Eno Calvin Normore,frmery af Princo’ Pisophy De- tortment, for sever! ill references t Scola sures Dr, Hale! Dansger Kindly sggeted references peaing vcetiy Algeria ao rtf wo Me Lazy Miler or tere suggertion od for is enooroement Tam indebled to Dr. Ort L Pelty my fend and former colleague atthe Prncston University Libary, fr ganerouly Celuncering to cea the sate mnuiep inner brs Tis metclousstenton 10 det and seae of se havo Inproved the work gel, nd have incorporated many of his "Thank Dr, Dster George of th Stusibthek, Wei Ber ln, for forking me wih rfl pies of s-Chuss a Imi aod ambos Tesh ebay, 18m so gael oe Frincsten University Library fr allowing me 0 re the Arabic ‘Bunsen ncomparecalectons “Tis works rvaton of ty doctoral dteraton which 1 sultan May 198 tthe Depatnent of Ne astra Stules of trincton Unto, Ihave reved snd coneted the work rouphout and bree rewritten several rections completly. T ‘Bowl! et hak he Beal of at deparaent the po tence and encouragement Tam especaly ptf o Prosar Jerome Clinton, Jokn Maks, nd Roy P. Mostabwdeh for thet ve sad support Tao wiht thank Professors George F. How nd Mi cel E. Marmors forsaking arable tote reader yore fr Pact Uniesty Pret The sommes ve sed toe several errs and guide new fre sources whch Eve improved th wore {Rave incorporated ther sagestons