Abu: the difficulty comes because Iqbal presupposes that his terminology is understood by all. Once you google the terms, such as "first mover" Prime mover" or have access to an enc. of philosophy, his words emerge to make an amazingly clear scenario: this is why he says that if you say god made this, then logically (philosophically, not faith), one has the right to ask: and who made god? And if you say someone made THAT god, then the question can go on ad infinitum....
the muslim faith scholars took care of this by saying such a question is haram. Iqbal, also schooled in Islam, and of course deeper intellectually, took that argument and showed them WHY it comes out of their own reasoning.
If you guys ahve access to his poetry in translation, it is amazing.
My dad once gave me his (translated)lament: you call yourselves mussulmans, and yet you divide yourselves into sects so countless beyond number,
think you the world its gifts will still on such as you bestow?

Dara, thanks for the little summaries. It does help and I do appreciate the comparisons to ibn Rushd since he was a topic of discussion in the last book I was reading (Lost History).

quote:

N Saudi he is only mentioned as a legal scholar, and his philosophy is overlooked.

Wasnt ibn Rushd work based on Maliki fiqh, the one that the Saudis follow supposedly.

He has also done a lot of work in Mathematics, Astronomy and medicine.

one of the great sons of Al Andalus.

No, U r right he was a maliki jurist and a qadi at that, author of "bidayat al mujtahid". But although Malik supposedly based his view on the 'ahl al madina" saudi fiqh is based on Hanbali constructs. In many cases, the scholars of traditional universities go between shafi and hanbali, as some do not view hanbal as a legitimate independent madhab.
Shariah grads who are foreign, and NOT indoctrinated in the middle eastern system, benefit from the saudi system and play around with all eight of the different madhabs...you find bosnians loving abu hanifa, africans lovng malik. Many of the younger saudis love ibn hazm, whose temper makes one wonder if he may have been actually a proto-berbician.

A medieval Muslim scholar had to be a polymath, as "ilm" was regarded as knowledge in general,and an ALIM was a scientist as opposed to a FAQIH, based on religious knowledge only. THis is why medieval scholars are way deeper in Islam..the recognized that science and faith, while often incompatible, ought not to block out each other. Modern scholars, based on indoctrination, make a disharmonious divide.