Discussion Starter: Al-Ghazali's similarities and differences with Paul

Al-Ghazali’s search for absolute truth and its source guides him through the sciences of theology, of the instructionalists, philosophy, and finally mysticism which he identifies as the science which leads to God, grants some higher knowledge, an a healing of the ailments of the heart. Knowledge to heal, Al-Ghazali identifies as the most important, essential and necessary. His own position towards the disease is one aware of how he too is sick as he writes,

The heart has its own disease that leads ultimately to its eternal otherworldly destruction; as the Almighty has said: ‘A disease is in their hearts’ [Qur’an 2:10]. Ignorance of God is the heart’s destructive poison and disobedience of God through the pursuit of passion is its diseased affliction. Cognizance of God Almighty is its revivifying antidote and obedience to God by opposing passion is its therapeutic medicine (87).

Al-Ghazali doesn’t exempt himself from the diseases for which “generally speaking, the prophets (peace be upon them) are the physicians of” (87). He describes his own attachment to fame and wealth, his own inability to leave his institution and city and God’s ability to transform him and heal him. Al-Ghazali declares plainly,

There can be no ability and no power without God the Exalted and Magnificent. I was not the one who made the move, but rather God moved me; and I did not act but rather He acted through me. I ask Him to reform me first, then to reform through me; to guide me and to guide through me (92).

It is here that Al-Ghazali appears too similar to Paul in the Christian context who is too aware of the sickly state of his soul or heart, and thinks of Christ as a healer. The distinction between the two is that there is no pure intermediary for Al-Ghazali, Christ doesn’t exist, and though prophets may be physicians they too were sick at a time, their prescriptions for ailments come from experience. 

            Al-Ghazali’s mysticism and divergence from Paul appears when he determines, as prophets experience and words have outlined, “acts of worship, which are medications for the afflictions of the heart, are composed of actions of various types and quantities” (87). There are properties, healing properties, said inherent in ritual. It seems that the performance of worship, ritual itself has the ability to heal hearts as outlined by prophets and mystics. To anyone doubtful, Al-Ghazali asks, “Why not admit the possibility of properties among the religious principles that are capable of healing and purifying the heart, which cannot be apprehended but the wisdom of the intellect but can be seen only by the eye of prophecy (94).” Additionally he asks his readers to listen “to the statements of the prophets, who have experienced and had a vision of the truth in every aspect of the religious law” and suggests that possibly is they “follow their path, [they] will apprehend some of that through direct vision” (95).

Ritual, and simple performance seems to Al-Ghazali the thing most necessary for healing, faith seems to be a consequence rather than cause for the actions. Paul instead suggests that faith is the starting point, itself required for any healing to occur. What do we make of Paul’s or Christian doctrine’s apparent influence on Al-Ghazali? What do we make of the distinctions apparent between Paul and Al-Ghazali in particular how they view the attainment of faith, and highest forms of knowledge?