Ibn Rushd – Averroes
(Abu al-Walid Muhammad ibn Ahmad Ibn Rushd, 1126–1198 CE) is one of the greatest scholars in the history of Islam. Remarkably, he was both a major jurist and a critical philosopher. During my early studies in Islamic law, I assumed that Ibn Rushd the jurist was a different person from Ibn Rushd the philosopher. I later discovered that the great Maliki jurist who authored Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid is the very same thinker who turned toward philosophy and became the most famous philosopher of Islam.
It should be noted that Ibn Rushd is known as “Ibn Rushd the Grandson” (Ibn Rushd al-Hafid), while his grandfather, Ibn Rushd al-Jadd, was also a prominent Maliki jurist but had no philosophical role.
Although Ibn Rushd is present in nearly all discussions of intellectual renaissance in both Islamic and European history, we are concerned here with his role in promoting harmony among religions. He gained wide respect among Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, though later he was accused by some strict opponents of unbelief in Islam, heresy in Christianity, and deviation in Judaism.
We may record Ibn Rushd’s strong critique of al-Ghazali in his famous work Tahafut al-Tahafut (The Incoherence of the Incoherence). Al-Ghazali wrote Tahafut al-Falasifa (The Incoherence of the Philosophers) on the assumption that he possessed absolute truth, condemning many of the greatest philosophers of history as misguided and ignorant—from Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates to major Muslim thinkers such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna), al-Farabi, and al-Kindi.
When combined with his other work Fada’ih al-Batiniyya (The Infamies of the Esotericists), a large number of Islamic sects were also classified as deviant or doomed. Moreover, some of his legal opinions included extremely harsh and violent rulings calling for the killing of entire groups such as the Druze and Ismailis, even in the absence of any aggression on their part.
This stance provoked Ibn Rushd, especially given that al-Ghazali belonged to the Sufi tradition, which is generally associated with tolerance and spiritual openness. It is this context that led Ibn Rushd to write his renowned Tahafut al-Tahafut.
In this work, Ibn Rushd introduces the leading philosophers and sages from both Greek and Islamic traditions, analyzing their methods of reasoning and their approaches to metaphysical truths—whether they discussed God, matter (hyle), the First Cause, the Necessary Existent, wisdom, the divine essence, union, or incarnation, among other philosophical and religious concepts. He concludes without hesitation that all these ideas are attempts to reach God.
He argues that Islamic belief should be characterized by flexibility and intellectual openness, allowing for differences in interpretation, based on the principle that religion belongs to God and creation are His servants. It is therefore inappropriate for God to have sent prophets and revelations only for them to become sources of conflict and hostility. Divine guidance cannot be limited to a small group of people merely by circumstance, while others are placed under divine wrath or rejection.
Among the most controversial issues in Ibn Rushd’s thought—those for which he was accused of heresy—are the eternity of the world, God’s knowledge and providence, the unity of the intellect and soul, and bodily resurrection. These positions are often cited as evidence of his divergence from orthodox theology. His books were even burned amid public outrage, yet Ibn Rushd himself did not deny religious doctrine; rather, he interpreted it in a way that harmonized it with philosophy.
Ibn Rushd caused what can be described as an intellectual earthquake in Europe. His central thesis was that there is a single truth accessible through two paths: faith and philosophy. When these two appear to conflict, sacred texts must be interpreted allegorically. In other words, the pursuit of philosophical truth (or scientific knowledge) is essential, and faith alone is not sufficient without rational inquiry.
He opposed a literal interpretation of bodily resurrection and eternal physical punishment in the afterlife, aligning in this respect with Ibn Sina and al-Farabi. He considered that such descriptions, especially regarding punishment of morally upright individuals who differed in belief, are incompatible with divine justice and mercy. Eternal punishment, in his view, cannot be reconciled with God’s absolute justice.
He therefore argued that reward and punishment primarily concern the soul rather than the physical body, though he did not reject bodily imagery of resurrection, seeing it as pedagogically useful for encouraging virtue. He attempted a reconciliation by suggesting that blessed souls may be associated with blissful bodies in the afterlife, and vice versa.
Ibn Rushd had a major and unique influence on Jewish and Christian intellectual traditions. In Judaism, he deeply influenced the most famous medieval Jewish philosopher, Moses Maimonides, who was twelve years younger than Ibn Rushd. Some accounts suggest they may have met in Andalusia, while others argue that no meeting took place but that there was intellectual correspondence and mutual influence. Maimonides incorporated Ibn Rushd’s thought into Jewish philosophy, particularly his open attitude toward religions and philosophical inquiry as presented in Tahafut al-Tahafut.
In the Christian tradition, Ibn Rushd’s influence came primarily through Thomas Aquinas (d. 1474), one of the most prominent medieval Christian theologians, who engaged with Ibn Rushd’s works and incorporated some of his concepts into Christian scholastic theology.
It can therefore be said without exaggeration that Ibn Rushd’s students in Christianity and Judaism were no less significant than his intellectual followers within Islam.