In addition to the K^m^a@-ye sa¿a@dat, his most important book in Persian, GÚaza@l^ wrote a number of shorter works in Persian, which for the most part either reiterate or elaborate on the contents of the K^m^a@. Written after his return to his birthplace of T®u@s in 498/1105, these works contain homilies and counsel addressed to the sultan and his ministers, as well as to his own disciples; they stress the necessity of adhering to the provisions of the æar^¿a and condemn those who fail to do so.

Apart from the K^m^a@, the most celebrated of GÚaza@l^'s works in Persian is Nasá^hat al-molu@k, written most probably for Sultan Sanjar b. Malekæa@h (or possibly for Sanjar's brother, Sultan Moháammad). In the edition published by Jala@l-al-D^n Homa@÷^, this work consists of two parts, of which only the first (pp. 1-79) can reliably be attributed to GÚaza@l^. In many parts the language and the contents are strikingly similar to, and in some passages a verbatim copy of, the K^m^a@ (e.g., cf. pp. 3-5 and 27-46 with K^m^a@ I, pp. 124-30 and 534-42). In the opening section of the Nasá^háat al-molu@k, GÚaza@l^, drawing on a koranic verse (14:24), advises the sultan to pursue eternal felicity (sa¿a@dat-e ja@v^da@n), which he likens to a tree growing from the seed of faith (tokòm-e ^ma@n) planted in the chest and the heart (ed. Homa@÷^, p. 2). The tree should be cultivated and nourished by devoting each Friday to worship. This tree has ten roots and ten branches (pp. 2-5). The roots correspond to essential articles of faith: the knowledge of God, His transcendence, His omnipotence, His omniscience, His will, His attributes of vision and hearing, His attribute of speech, His attribute of acting, judgment and the hereafter, and belief in His prophets. The branches of the tree consist of man's external actions, worship, the observance of justice, and the avoidance of injustice. These themes are illustrated with numerous sayings of the Prophet and anecdotes concerning the great figures of religious tradition (pp. 13 ff.).

The second and longer part of Nasá^háat al-molu@k (pp. 81 ff.), differs considerably in content and style from the well-known writings of GÚaza@l^. It is replete with stories about the pre-Islamic kings of Persia, especially Ano@æ^rava@n and his justice, as well as maxims attributed to Aristotle, Socrates, Alexander, and Bozorgmehr (q.v.). It refers to the concept of the divine glory of kings (farr-e ^zad^), and quotes many Persian verses, a practice GÚaza@l^ generally avoided. In the second edition, Homa@÷^ expresses some ambivalence on the attribution of this part of the book to GÚaza@l^ (Intro., pp. lxxi-lxxx), and both ¿Abd-al-H®osayn Zarr^nku@b (pp. 256-60) and Patricia Crone have presented arguments to prove that GÚaza@l^ could not be its author. Some Western scholars such as Henri Laoust, A. K. S. Lambton, and F. R. C. Bagley have nonetheless treated it as an authentic work of GÚaza@l^ in their discussions of the work (see bibliography below). Nasá^háat al-molu@k has been translated into Arabic more than once; an early translation entitled al-Tebr al-masbu@k f^ nasá^háat al-molu@k has been published several times.

Pand-na@ma, another book of advice attributed to GÚaza@l^ and probably addressed also to Sultan Sanjar, has received little scholarly attention. In its contents it greatly resembles the first part of Nasá^háat al-molu@k as well as some other works of GÚaza@l^, such as the K^m^a@ and Za@d-e a@kòerat. The introduction to the book relates that GÚaza@l^ wrote the Pand-na@ma in response to a certain king who had asked him for advice. A great deal of the book is devoted to the necessity of remembering death and the transience of worldly life and seeking true felicity in the hereafter. Its themes are illustrated with stories concerning the prophets and other religious figures. The Pand-na@ma exists in numerous manuscripts, all of relatively recent transcription. The lack of any early extant manuscripts of the work has led a number of scholars to doubt its ascription to GÚaza@l^, although its contents are clearly drawn from his writings.

The attribution to GÚaza@l^ of a third book of counsel addressed to kings, Toháfat al-molu@k, is utterly unfounded, although its section on religious beliefs has been drawn from the first part of Nasá^háat al-molu@k. The celebrated story of Shaikh S®an¿a@n, developed at length by ¿AtÂtÂa@r (q.v.) in MantÂeq al-tÂayr, appears to have been taken by him from this Toháfat al-molu@k, which has led a number of Persian and Western scholars to attribute mistakenly the origin of the story to GÚaza@l^ (Pu@rjawa@d^, 2000, pp. 4-12).

Ay farzand (O son!) is the book of counsel that GÚaza@l^ wrote for one of his close disciples. It is frequently punctuated by the address Ay farzand (O son!), and this exclamation has come to serve as its common title, although the titles K¨ola@sáat al-tasáa@n^f and Farzand-na@ma are also encountered. From GÚaza@l^'s mention in this work of Ehya@÷ ¿olu@m al-d^n and the K^m^a@-ye sa¿a@dat it can be deduced that he wrote it toward the end of his life. He begins by citing some counsels of the Prophet before answering questions asked of him by his disciple on such matters as the duties of the spiritual wayfarer, the nature of Sufism, servanthood (¿obu@d^yat), trust in God (tawakkol), and sincerity of devotion. Queries on aspects of direct mystical experience (dòawq) he declines to answer, on the grounds that such topics cannot be expounded verbally. The entirety of this work has a Sufi coloration, in an eloquent and attractive style. As usual, GÚaza@l^ cites many koranic verses and traditions of the Prophet, which he leaves untranslated. He also quotes a number of verses in Arabic and Persian, and one of the Persian verses appears to be his own composition: gar mey do haza@r ratÂl bar peyma@÷^/ta@ mey nakòor^ naba@æad-at æeyda@÷^ (Even if you measure out two thousand cups of wine/As long as you do not drink the wine, you will not feel intoxicated). Ay farzand has been translated into Arabic more than once, one of which, under the title Ayyoh al-walad, has served as the basis for versions in German by Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall and in French by Toufic Sabbagh.

Za@d-e a@kòerat is a kind of manual of religious observance for those among his followers (¿awa@mm) who lacked the intellectual wherewithal to benefit from the K^m^a@ (Za@d-e a@kòerat, p. 3). This, too, appears to be one of the last works he wrote. The greater part of it consists of the Persian translation of one of his Arabic works, Beda@yat al-heda@ya; it deals with aspects of everyday life such as waking up, putting on one's clothes, going to the mosque, praying, fasting etc., as well as various forms of supplicatory prayer (do¿a@, q.v.) and the avoidance of sin. Za@d-e a@kòerat contains in addition the same material on credal matters that is to be found in the first section of Nasá^háat al-molu@k as well as the K^m^a@. The treatise concludes with a section on "the correct norms of conduct toward the Creator and creature," which is also present in Beda@yat al-heda@ya. W. Montgomery Watt omitted this section from his English translation of Beda@yat al-heda@ya, which he included in his book on GÚaza@l^ (pp. 86-152), under the misapprehension that it had been wrongly attributed to GÚaza@l^. Watt apparently was unaware of Za@d-e a@kòerat, which must be taken as confirming GÚaza@l^'s authorship of the entire Beda@yat al-heda@ya.

Fazµa@÷el al-ana@m men rasa@÷el H®ojjat al-Esla@m is the collection of letters that GÚaza@l^ wrote to sultans, ministers, military commanders, jurists, and some of his friends after his return to Khorasan. The collection, apparently assembled by one of his grandchildren after his death, contains thirty-four letters of varying length divided into five chapters. The longest letter might also count as a treatise in its own right, being a response to objections raised against some of his statements in Meæka@t al-anwa@r and al-Monqedò men al-zµala@l. One such objection was that by describing God as true light, GÚaza@l^ had fallen prey to the dualistic Mazdean belief in light and darkness as forming antithetical realms (ed. Mo÷ayyad T¨a@bet^, p. 9). Some letters include discussion of credal and mystical issues. In the letters to the sultan and military commanders he stresses the necessity of justice and solicitude for the populace, while in letters to ministers, including Fakòr-al-Molk (q.v.), the eldest son of K¨úa@ja Nezáa@m-al-Molk, he deals with theological questions.

The references made in these letters to events that occurred toward the end of GÚaza@l^'s life, between the years 499-505/1105-11, endow them with particular interest. His letters to Sultan Sanjar were apparently written between 499/1105, when he left T®u@s for N^æa@pu@r at the request of Fakòr-al-Molk to teach at the Nezáa@m^ya madrasa in that city, and his return to T®u@s approximately one year later after the murder of Fakòr-al-Molk. In 504/1110, when Abu'l-H®asan ¿Al^ b. Moháammad K^a@ Harra@s, the principal of the Nezáa@m^ya in Baghdad, died, Nezáa@m-al-D^n Ahámad (Z˜^a@÷-al-Molk), the other son of Nezáa@m-al-Molk, who at that time was minister to Sultan Moháammad b. Malekæa@h, asked GÚaza@l^ to go to Baghdad and replace him, but in a letter included in this collection he declined (ed. Mo÷ayyad T¨a@bet^, pp. 39-46).

Other letters of GÚaza@l^ comprise the fatwa@s he gave on various theoretical and practical problems pertaining to the Sufis of his age; these are to be distinguished from his relatively brief fatwa@s in Arabic that are on purely legal questions. Nine fatwa@s in Persian and one in Arabic on Sufi topics have been discovered so far in two manuscripts. One such fatwa@ relates to the permissibility of sama@¿, the musical sessions of the Sufis. GÚaza@l^ expresses the same view as in Eháya@÷ ¿olu@m al-d^n and K^m^a@-ye sa¿a@dat: Sama@¿ is in itself neither licit nor illicit, its status being dependent on the inner state of the person participating in it (Pu@rjawa@d^, 1990a, pp. 8-17; for text and commentary). The fatwa@ was apparently written for someone ignorant of Arabic, for GÚaza@l^ translates into Persian the traditions of the Prophet that he cites. Another fatwa@ deals with seven queries about the primordial covenant that was concluded by the descendants of the Children of Adam before their spirits entered this world, as described in the Koran (7:172). The most important of the queries was whether those descendants had a real and sensory existence when they responded affirmatively to God's question: "Am I not your Lord?"; and if so, whether it was in a world other than the present one. Abu'l-Qa@sem Jonayd, H®osayn b. Mansáu@r H®alla@j, and GÚaza@l^'s own younger brother, Ahámad GÚaza@l^, were all convinced that the covenant had indeed been sealed in a separate and distinctive realm, but GÚaza@l^'s fatwa@ was to the effect that the descendants of Adam did not have some pre-eternal existence in a world other than this present one, and he interpreted the question and answer contained in the koranic verse in a metaphorical sense. A third fatwa@ was delivered in response to a question concerning the relationship between the love of God, which is the eternal and uncreated Love, and that of man, who is created. GÚaza@l^ explains that the relationship of the two is like that of the sun and its infinitely numerous rays (Pu@rjawa@d^, 1990b; for the text of the three fatwa@s, with a commentary).

Also worthy of mention among GÚaza@l^'s fatwa@s is one concerning the conditions for making use of the endowments of a Sufi hospice (Pu@rjawa@d^, 1991; for text and commentary). This appears to be the earliest known fatwa@ on the subject, and as such must be taken as an indication of the growing importance of the kòa@naqa@h as a religious and social institution toward the close of the 11th century. According to GÚaza@l^'s fatwa@, only a Sufi is entitled to benefit from the endowments of the kòa@naqa@h, a Sufi being defined as one who has the morals and comportment of the Sufi and has not committed a sin that would occasion his expulsion from their ranks. In the same fatwa@ he touches on the problem of mendicancy, which he regards as forbidden except in case of dire need. He also has an Arabic fatwa@ on the same subject, which has been included in the Eháya@÷, at the end of the relevant section on the lawful and unlawful (Keta@b al-háala@l wa 'l-háara@m).

Last among the Persian works of GÚaza@l^ comes his treatise in condemnation of the antinomians, H®ama@qat-e ahl-e eba@háat (also known as Radd-e eba@há^ya). Illustrated abundantly with koranic verses, traditions of the Prophet, allegorical stories, and the dicta of eminent men of religion, this treatise contains material also found in other works of GÚaza@l^, such as the nine squares written on two pieces of pottery that are given to pregnant women, which is mentioned both in al-Monqed men al-zµala@l and in one of the Persian fatwa@s. GÚaza@l^'s tone in this treatise is harsh and angry; he condemns the antinomians as apostates whose marriages are invalid and whose blood may legitimately be shed. It was probably written after GÚaza@l^'s return to T®u@s from Baghdad and Syria but before his composition of K^m^a@-ye sa¿a@dat.

This treatise, like the fatwa@s, shows that GÚaza@l^ chose Persian as his medium whenever he wished to write on the problems of the society in which he lived. The other works discussed in this article also tend to demonstrate that Persian was for him more than the language of daily or familial use. He thought in Persian and used it to examine some of the most profound questions of mysticism and theology. He must, indeed, be accounted one of the earliest and most important writers of religious works in Persian.

Bibliography: Persian Texts by GÚaza@l^: Ay farzand, publ. as an appendix to Maka@t^b-e fa@rs^, ed. ¿A. Eqba@l, pp. 79-94; ed. S. B. Ahámad as K¨ola@sáat al-tasáa@n^f, Hyderabad (Deccan) n.d.; ed. S. Naf^s^ as "Nasá^háat-na@ma," AÚmu@zeæ o parvareæ 22, 1326 ˆ./1947, 1, pp. 10-15, 2, pp. 7-13, 3, pp. 18-24; tr. as Ayyoh al-walad, ed. and tr. J. von Hammer-Purgstall as Oh Kind, Vienna, 1838; ed. G. H. Scherer, Beirut, 1936; ed. A. MatÂlu@b, Baghdad, 1986; tr. T. Sabbagh as Lettre au disciple, Beirut, 1969. H®ama@qat-e ahl-e eba@háat, ed. O. Pretzl as Die Streitschrift des G˜aza@l^ gegen die Iba@h^ja, Sitzungsberichte der bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Abteilung, 1933, repr. with Pers. tr. of Pretzl's intro. by Ù. Pahlava@n, Zam^na-ye ^ra@n-æena@s^, Tehran, 1364 ˆ./ 1985. K^m^a@-ye sa¿a@dat, ed. H®. K¨ad^v Jam, 2 vols., Tehran, 1361 ˆ./1982. Maka@t^b-e fa@rs^-e GÚaza@l^ ba na@m-e Fazµa@÷el al-ana@m men rasa@÷el H®ojjat-al-Esla@m, ed. ¿A. Eqba@l, Tehran, 1333 ˆ./1954; ed. ¿A. Mo÷ayyad T¨a@bet^, Tehran, 1333 ˆ./1954; tr. Abdul Qayyum as Letters of Al-Ghazzali, Lahore, 1976. Nasá^háat al-molu@k, ed. J. Homa@÷^, Tehran, 1351 ˆ./1972; Arabic tr., as al-Tebr al-masbu@k f^ Nasá^háat al-molu@k, Beirut, 1988; tr. F. R. C. Bagley as Ghaza@li's Book of Counsel for Kings, Oxford, 1964. Idem, Pand-na@ma, Tehran, 1311 ˆ./1932. Idem, Za@d-e a@kòerat, ed. Mora@d Awrang, Tehran, 1352 ˆ./1973. Pseudo-GÚaza@l^, "Toháfat al-molu@k-e Ema@m Abu@ H®a@med Moháammad GÚaza@l^," ed. M.-T. Da@neæpa‘u@h, MDAM 1, 1344 ˆ./1965, pp. 246-300. See also under Arberry and Pu@rjawa@d^ below.

Studies: A. J. Arberry, The Chester Beatty Library: A Handlist of the Arabic Manuscripts III, Dublin, 1958, pp. 78-81 (contains four short works by GÚaza@l^; for a commentary and edition, see Pu@rjawa@d@^, 1990a, 1990b, 1991). P. Crone, "Did al-Ghaza@l^ Write a Mirror for Princes? On the Authorship of Nasá^háat al-mulu@k," Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 10, 1987, pp. 167-91. ¿A. Daæt^, "GÚaza@l^ wa Nas^háat al-molu@k," in idem, ¿Oqala@÷ bar kòela@f-e ¿aql, Tehran, 1352 ˆ./1973, pp. 57-92. Ch.-H. de Fouche‚cour, Moralia: les notions morales dans la litte‚rature persane du 3e/9e au 7e/13e sieàcle, Paris, 1986, pp. 389-412. A. K. S. Lambton, "The Theory of Kingship in the Nas^háat ul-Mulu@k of Ghaza@l^," Islamic Quarterly 1, 1954, pp. 47-55. Idem, State and Government in Medieval Islam, Oxford, 1981, pp. 117-26. H. Laoust, La politique de GÚaza@l^, Paris, 1970. Monzaw^, Noskòaha@, pp. 726, 1184, 1297-98, 1705-6. W. Montgomery Watt, The Faith and Practice of Al-Ghaza@l^, London, 1953. N. Pu@rjawa@d^, "Mo¿arref^-e ±aha@r at¯ar-ku@ta@h-e fa@rs^ az Abu@ H®a@med GÚaza@l^" Ma¿a@ref 7/1, 1369 ˆ./1990a, pp. 3-19. Idem, "¿Ahd-e alast," Ma¿a@ref 7/2, 1369 ˆ./1990b, pp. 3-48. Idem, "Do maktu@b-e fa@rs^ az ema@m Mohaámmad GÚaza@l^," Ma¿a@ref 8/1, 1370 ˆ./1991, pp. 3-36. Idem, "'Toháfat al-molu@k' wa da@sta@n-e ˆaykò S®an¿a@n," Ma¿a@ref 17/1, 1379 ˆ./2000, pp. 3-20. Idem, Pa‘u@heæha@-^ dar ba@ra-ye Moháammad GÚaza@l^ wa Fakòr Ra@z^, forthcoming (contains the Persian fatwa@s of GÚaza@l^, his Ar. fatwa@ on the conditions of benefiting from the endowments of a kòa@naqa@h, H®ama@qat-e ahl-e eba@háat, Pand-na@ma, and Toháfat al-molu@k). M. Wickens, "The 'Persian Letters' Attributed to Al-Ghaza@l^," Islamic Quarterly 3, 1956, pp. 109-16. ¿A.-H. Zarr^nku@b, Fara@r az madrasa, Tehran, 1353 ˆ./1974, pp. 254-61.