Sufism

The self must be trained like a wild horse, patiently, not broken by force

Al-Ghazali warns that suppressing desire by brute force tends to backfire, producing a skittish, unreliable self, much as a horse broken violently becomes harder to work with than one trained through patient repetition.

In Book 22 of the Ihya, al-Ghazali is careful to distinguish the discipline he recommends from outright suppression or self-mortification for its own sake, reaching for an image from horsemanship to make the difference clear: a wild horse broken by brute force becomes skittish and unreliable, while one trained patiently through repetition and reward becomes genuinely useful and cooperative. Applied to the nafs, his point is that appetites like hunger and desire are not enemies to be destroyed but necessary, God-given faculties that keep the body alive, faculties needing habituation so they serve the self's higher purposes rather than dictate to it. This is one reason his prescribed disciplines, moderate fasting rather than starvation, structured routine rather than sudden extreme renunciation, are gradual and sustainable rather than dramatic, since he holds that lasting change in character comes from steady practice, not a single act of forceful denial.

Ihya Ulum al-Din

Written about in

• What Sufism says about habit and discipline

  Ghazali reaches for horsemanship: a horse broken by brute force becomes skittish and unreliable, one trained through patient repetition becomes genuinely useful. Applied to the nafs, appetites are God-given faculties keeping the body alive, not enemies to destroy. Discipline by force is bad technique in his account, not admirable severity.