Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the ...

Notes to Chapter 8 307
3. See George Hourani, Islamic Rationalism: The Ethics of ‘Abd al-Jabbår
(London: Oxford University Press, 1971).
4. Trans. M. Abdul Hye in his “Ash‘arism,” in A History of Muslim
Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 223.
5. This work is one of the most exhaustive among a whole class of
writings in Islam, usually called “firaq” or “sects,” literature associated with
the names of al-Nawbakht¥, al-Baghdåd¥, Ibn ¡azm, al-Shahrastån¥, and others.
Al-Ash‘ar¥’s work is also among the most thorough and detailed work in
this category of religious writings usually composed by scholars of kalåm.
6. On the metaphysical critique of Ash‘arite voluntarism, see Frithjof
Schuon, Christianity/Islam: Essays on Esoteric Ecumenism, trans. G. Polit
(Bloomington: World Wisdom Books, 1981), 203ff. Many studies and translations
have been made of al-Ash‘ar¥. See, e.g., Walter C. Klein, The Elucidation
of Islam’s Foundation (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1940), which
contains a translation of al-Ibånah; Richard J. McCarthy, The Theology of al-
Ash‘ar¥ (Beirut: Imprimerie Catholique, 1953), which contains a study of al-
Ash‘ar¥ and the translation of two of his creeds; Daniel Gimaret, La Doctrine
d’al-Ash’ari (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1992); and Duncan B. Macdonald,
Development of Muslim Theology: Jurisprudence of Constitutional Theory (New
York: Scribner’s Sons, 1926).
7. On Ash‘arite atomism and occasionalism, see the still valuable work
of S. Pines, Beiträge zur islamischen Atomenlehre (Berlin: Heine, 1936) trans. by
Michael Schwarz as Studies in Islamic Atomism (Jerusalem: Magnus Press, 1997);
and Majid Fakhry, Islamic Occasionalism (London: Allen and Unwin, 1958).
Ash‘arite atomism was not new in Islam in the sense that certain Mu‘tazilites
had already developed such a theory, but it became much more elaborated
than before by the Ash‘arites and was made a cornerstone of their theological
system.
8. The Islamic philosophers refuted this view strongly, as seen in the
arguments offered by Averroes in his Incoherence of the Incoherence against al-
Ghazzål¥ on this issue. See S. H. Nasr, Science and Civilization in Islam, pp.
318ff. It is of interest to note that David Hume used the same argument as
the Ash‘arites to refute causality and even mentioned the example of fire
and cotton given by al-Ghazzål¥ and referred to by Averroes. Needless to
say, Hume did not reach the same conclusion as the Ash‘arites, because he
did not see the Divine Will as the cause of all things.
9. This is the translation of kalåm al-muta˘akhkhir¥n given by G. C.
Anawati in his article on kalåm in the new Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 8,
p. 238.
10. He was well versed in Islamic philosophy as well as in medicine,
astronomy, and even the “hidden sciences” (al-‘ul¶m al-ghar¥bah or khafiyyah).