scholar at the Nizamiyya Madrasa in Baghdad illustrates his role in reli-
gious institutionalization. Despite his apparent renunciation of philosophy
expressed in theIncoherence of the Philosophers, his spiritual crisis only
four years after his appointment led him to reconcile theology with Sufi
insight in later texts replete with philosophy. Calling himself themujaddid
(reviver) of Islam and later known as the‘proof of Islam’(hujjat al-Islam)
he wrote in both Arabic and Persian to address to the broadest possible
community of Muslims.
His treatiseBalance of Action(Mizan al-Amal) compares the attainment
of knowledge through philosophical and Sufiinspiration. It suggests that
for most people, the acquired intellect enabled through philosophical
speculation is fraught with the danger of complex, potentially heretical
false doctrine. Instead, the inspiration (ilham) and unveiling (kashf)
through which God casts light into the heart of the believer through Sufi
practice ultimately provides the same kind of knowledge as philosophy. He
found the polishing of the heart, which made the replica shine directly to
them through divine illumination, still more effective. He therefore advo-
cates Sufism over the logical deductions of empiricism as the preferable
path to knowledge for most people.^2 Adhering to the Aristotelian prefer-
ence for rationally argued demonstrative over intuitively understood sym-
bolic speech, al-Ghazali generally employs direct argumentation.^3
However, much as Plato deploys allegory despite his wariness of poets,
al-Ghazali deploys a parable to elucidate the interdependence of both
rhetorical strategies:
This reminds me of an example where it is not ruled out for people with limited
intellect who require sensible examples to simulate understanding the truths of
reason. It also illustrates the difference between the two groups. It is said that the
Chinese and Romans were competing before a king over the highest skill in
drawing and painting. The king decided to give them a vault in which the
Chinese could paint one wall, and the Romans the other. Between them a curtain
would be drawn to prevent each group from observing the other. As soon as they
werefinished, the curtain would be lifted, both sides would be judged, and the
winner would emerge. And so it came to pass. The Romans collected innumerable
rare colors, while the Chinese, without using any colors, made their side polished
and smooth, such that the observers wondered at how they could want no colors.
When the Romans announced that they were done, the Chinese said they were as
well. The Chinese were asked,“How could you be done, when you have used
neither colors nor have painted?”They repeated,“Don’t worry! Lift the curtain,(^2) Heath, 2005 : 196–7. (^3) Gutas, 1988 : 306.
132 Seeing through the Mirror