Islamic Empire Pocket Map

Al-Gazzali Questions

"On the Separation of Mathematics and Religion Al-Ghazali" Questions

1. What do the selections on mathematics and the scientific description of smallpox tell you about Islamic values?

                    The selection on mathematics reveals that there was a divide between Islamic holy values, or religious sciences, and mathematics, or exact sciences.  Mathematicians dealt with exact numbers and concepts and theories that could be proven.  Religious beliefs could not always be proven and therefore, mathematicians did not always believe in religious sciences or doctrine.  They articulated that religious doctrine was not always true, much to the chagrin of religious authorities.  According to Islamic holy laws the scientific world, such as the orbits of the sun and the moon, could be viewed from the religious as well the exact sciences.  Exact calculations, such as astronomical orbit calculations, could be explained through the exact sciences, but all other explanations were rooted in religious beliefs and laws.

      2. According to Al-Gazzali, should mathematics and religion be separated? Why or Why not?s

                    According to Al-Gazzali, mathematics and religion should be separated because they have no connection to each other; religious law does not condemn or approve of math or exact sciences, and exact sciences/math do not condemn or contradict religious sciences.  Mathematics is an exact science that can be proven, and people would believe that the impious views or unbeliefs’ of mathematicians are true because they are intellectual, learned men whose reasoning is not likely to be faulty.  Al-Gazzali believed that mathematics could not be linked to religion and that religion could not be linked to exact sciences such as mathematics; they should be separated because each one functions within a different domain. 

"Deliverance From Error"Questions

1. In what ways is Al-Gazzali's thinking similar to Plato's The Allegory of the Cave?  In what ways do they diverge?

                    Al-Gazzali's thinking is similar to Plato's The Allegory of the Cave in that both discussed the search for an absolute truth, more specifically, introspection and viewing reality.  Both Plato and Al-Gazzali were skeptics, who taught others not to believe the words of others, primarily because what was taught to them may have not been accurate.   Just because one was taught an ethic or principle didn’t mean that what they said or told was accurate. Plato had stated “We already know, but only in some implicit way, what it takes investigation to come to know explicitly,” implying that the only way to figure out information was to investigate and experiment, rather than relying on the words or thoughts of others.  Al-Gazzali’s thinking is similar to Plato’s thinking in that he too trusts nobody besides God, whom he believes to always lead one down the right path, “You should first of all know – God give you good guidance and gently lead you to the truth!” This shows that the only trustful source of information is essentially God.  Al-Gazzali’s thinking is also similar to Plato’s The Allegory of the Cave in that both agree that reality is unable to be envisioned by humans, but rather one must experience the real world to learn.  Al-Gazzali states, “I have been constantly diving into the depths of this profound sea and wading into its deep water like a bold man, not a cautious coward.  I would penetrate far into every murky mystery, pounce on every problem, and dash into every mazy difficulty.”  This quote shows that many aspects of life cannot be grasped or even understood by humans – that we are not able to perceive life as reality.  Plato takes a similar stance on this position in stating that humans live in a world where they do not see the reality of ideas.

                     However, Al-Gazzali's thinking is different than Plato's The Allegory of the Cave in that Al-Gazzali mentioned a path towards gaining power that was significantly different from Plato’s path towards gaining power.  Because Al-Gazzali’s faith included an afterlife with Allah, after the Day of Judgment, he believed that one would have to go into the afterlife in order to learn this information.  Contrastingly, Plato stated that it was fully possible for one to gain this knowledge, but via mediation or isolation/disengagement from society.  This may have been attributed to the fact that Pluto saw no reason to mention any afterlife in his reasoning (this could have been because he did not believe in an afterlife).  There was no final endpoint, where one’s soul would be guided down the right path in Plato’s world, while Allah served to provide judgment and guidance for those after they reached the afterlife.  

Baghdad Travel Brochure

11/8/13 Homework Questions

             1)  According to the prologue, what was the purpose of creating this code?

According to the prologue, the purpose of creating this Code was to ensure that the empire would be peaceful and prosperous.  The Byzantines did not want to have to have disputations and wars with other empires, “We adorn peace and maintain the Constitution of the State, and have such confidence in the protection of Almighty God that We do not depend upon Our arms, or upon Our soldiers, or upon those who conduct Our Wars…” This quote shows how the Byzantines wanted to avoid war and create a peaceful state, to avoid wars.  The Byzantines devised this Code, so that the chance of such a war occurring would be slim to none.  The Byzantines had originally adapted the Roman Code of Law, since they had been one complete empire prior to the split-up of the Roman Empire.  However, the Byzantines fond fault with many parts of the Roman Code of Law and created a new Law Code to clarify its meaning, “…having had removed all that is superfluous in resemblance and all iniquitous discord, they may afford to all men the ready assistance of true meaning”.  This shows that the Byzantines had created this new Law Code to both bring peace and prosperity to their empire by constructing a strict body of laws to which the citizens would have to abide (thus, making the empire centralized) and also to clarify the Roman Law Code they had adopted from the Eastern Roman Empire.

2) What does this text cite as the source of Roman law?

          This text cites the Lex Regia as the source of Roman law.  The Lex Regia was an ancient Roman           source of law codes.  In this body of laws, most power is given to the ruler, the emperor.  The                 emperor is authoritative and has complete power over everyone else, “all the rights and power of           the Roman people were transferred to the Emperor, We do not derive Our authority from that of             other different compilations, but wish that it shall all be entirely Ours…”  This shows that the Lex           Regia was the ultimate source of Roman law.  This can be seen in the fact that Byzantine                       emperors and rulers had absolute power, which followed the guiding principle of the Lex Regia. 

3) What, if anything, does this text teach us about Byzantine society?

          This text gives the reader much insight as to how the Byzantine society was run, what ethics and           morals they believed in, as well as the laws that governed society.  The first paragraph of this                 document shows the reader that the Byzantine Empire was very religious and Christian.  The                words “God,” “Celestial Majesty,” and “Almighty God” signify the importance and prevalence of          Christianity in the Byzantine Empire.  Christianity was also important to the Byzantine Empire in          that it played a major role in determining Byzantine Law, “ [we] place Our reliance upon the                  providence of the Holy Trinity, from which are derived the elements of the entire world and their            disposition throughout the globe.”  This document also gives an accurate insight as to the moral              standpoint of Byzantine inhabitants.  From this article, we learn that the Byzantines were fair                  rulers, who placed justice above all else, “Justice is the set and constant purpose which gives to             every man his due. jurisprudence is the knowledge of things divine and human, the science of the           just and the unjust…”.  This shows that justice and equality were integral to the maintenance of the           Byzantine Empire.  Lastly, this document shows how Byzantium laws functioned in the running           of Byzantine society.  Byzantine law distinguished the societal classes, mainly emphasizing the              difference between the wealthy nobles and the middle-class peasants.  The author writes, “Hence          comes the union of male and female, which we call marriage; hence the procreation and rearing of            children, for this is a law by the knowledge of which we see even the lower animals are                        distinguished,” which shows that society was based on both class and gender, and that the “lower          animals” of society, the peasants, had less power than did the more wealthy nobles, landowners,            and aristocracy.