Introduction:

The intellectual history of Islam witnessed one of the most profound philosophical confrontations in human history. This debate, centered on the relationship between Faith (Revelation) and Reason (Philosophy), was led by two giants: Imam Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd (Averroes). This article explores the core arguments of their disagreement and its lasting impact on both Islamic and Western thought.

1. Al-Ghazali’s Critique: The Incoherence of the Philosophers

In the 11th century, Al-Ghazali published his seminal work, Tahafut al-Falasifa (The Incoherence of the Philosophers). His goal was not to destroy reason, but to define its limits in the realm of metaphysics.

• The Attack on Causality: Al-Ghazali argued for “Occasionalism,” suggesting that God is the direct cause of every event, challenging the Aristotelian idea of natural necessity.
• The Three Charges: He famously identified twenty points of error, charging the philosophers with heresy on three specific issues: the eternity of the world, God’s knowledge of particulars, and the bodily resurrection.

2. Averroes’ Defense: The Incoherence of the Incoherence

A century later, the Cordoban philosopher Ibn Rushd responded with Tahafut al-Tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence). Averroes sought to rehabilitate philosophy, arguing that it is not only compatible with Islam but mandatory for those capable of it.

• The Harmony of Truth: His famous dictum states that “Truth (Philosophy) does not contradict Truth (Revelation).”
• The Allegory of Interpretation: Averroes argued that when Scripture appears to contradict reason, it must be interpreted allegorically (Ta’wil).

3. Causality vs. Divine Will (H2)

One of the deepest points of the debate was about the laws of nature.

• Averroes maintained that denying natural causes makes science impossible, as knowledge of a thing is knowledge of its cause.
• Al-Ghazali maintained that insisting on natural necessity limits the absolute power of God to perform miracles.

4. Legacy: From Islamic East to Latin West

While Al-Ghazali’s thought became dominant in the later Islamic world, Averroes’ commentaries on Aristotle became the foundation for the European Renaissance. Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastics spent centuries grappling with “Averroism,” eventually leading to the modern separation of church and state.

Conclusion

The debate between Al-Ghazali and Averroes remains a living dialogue. It forces us to ask: Can reason explain everything, or is there a domain where only the heart and revelation can speak? For the modern researcher, this dialogue is the key to understanding the balance between secular logic and spiritual conviction.

References:

1. Al-Ghazali. The Incoherence of the Philosophers. Translated by Michael E. Marmura.
2. Ibn Rushd (Averroes). The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Translated by Simon van den Bergh.
3. Leaman, Oliver. An Introduction to Classical Islamic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
4. Hourani, George F. Averroes on the Harmony of Religion and Philosophy.