SalafiTalk.Net » Affairs of Aqeedah
» Zakir Naik - Ibn Seena And Jarh Of Ahl-us-Sunnah Wal Jam'aah
Search ===>

Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 6Part 7Part 8Part 9 • Part 10 • Part 11 • Part 12

   Reply to this Discussion Start new discussion << previous || next >> 
Posted By Topic: Zakir Naik - Ibn Seena And Jarh Of Ahl-us-Sunnah Wal Jam'aah

book mark this topic Printer-friendly Version  send this discussion to a friend  new posts last

29-12-2005 @ 6:17 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Abu Abd Ar Rahman Abd Al Adheem Ibn Faheem ibn Zia ibn Ma'een (KSA/ Bangalore, India)
Posts: 305
Joined: Nov 2002
Bismillah Alhamdulillah' As-Salatu Wa-Assalaamu Alaa Rasoolullah

Zakir Naik?s praise for Ibn Seena - Introducing Ibn Seena

Zakir Naik says: ??..fifty volumes in medicine, written by Alee ibn Seena, knows as Avi Seena, he doesn?t sound a muslim! Alee ibn Seena, a Muslim, Avee Seena ? non-Muslim, who got the title ?Aristotle of the east? , he wrote the book ?Kaanoon? which was referred as textbook of medicine in as late as 17th century??.?

So who was Ibn Seena? Was he from amongst the Scholars of Ahl-is-Sunnah Or from the leaders of misguidance?

Jarh Of Imam adh-Dhahabee (rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Imaam Adh-Dhahabee said about him in Siyaar A?alaam An-Nubalaa, ?He has a book called Ash-Shifaa? (The Cure), it contains in it things that are not possible to tolerate, and Al-Ghazaalee had indeed made takfeer of him in his book Manqidh Min Ad-Dalaal.?

He also said about him, ?He is the leader of the Islamic philosophers, and since Al-Farabi?s death, there has not been any like him, so al-hamdulillaah for the blessing of Islaam and the Sunnah.? [ Siyaar A?alaam An-Nubalaa, (17/535) ]
[See also, Siyaar A'alaam An-Nubulaa, Volume 1/3, Page 1480, Last two Paragraphs under heading, Al-Hussain Ibn AbdAllaah Ibn al-Hasan Ibn Alee Ibn Seena al-Balkhee, published by Bayt-al-Afkaar-Ad-Dauliyyatu - New compressed edition]

In another book he (adh-Dhahabee) said, ?I am not aware of him having narrated anything from the Islaamic sciences, and even if he did, it would not be permissible to narrate from him because he is a perverted, deviant, philosopher.? Meezaanal-?Itidaal, (1/5391)

Jarh Of Imam Ibn Hajr(rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr said about him, ?The shaafi?ee scholar, Ibn Abee Al-Hamoowee said: the Scholars have all agreed that Ibn Sina used to say that the universe has always been in existence, and that the bodies will not be raised physically on the day of judgment. It also has been said that he used to say that Allaah does not have knowledge of the specifics (of everything that takes place); rather He is aware of what takes place in the general sense.

Thus, the scholars in his time and those after them, those scholars whose statements carry weight in matters of fiqh and usoolul-fiqh, have unequivocally declared him and al-Farabi to be kuffaar, because of their beliefs regarding these matters for they contradict the beliefs of the Muslims. [Lisaanal-Meezaan, (2/293)]

[Taken from : ]

Jarh Of Imam Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn al-Jawzee (rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Abul Farj Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn al-Jawzee (rahimahullah) said in his famous book, Talbees Iblees refuting Ibn Seena and Mu?ta?zila?.

??..Majority of philosophers have adopted the view that Allah Ta?aala does not have any knowledge except of His Own Dhaat even though its already been proven that the creation have the knowledge of their own selves and also the knowledge of al-Khaaliq hence they have given a higher station to the creation than al-Khaaliq. The author (Yahya ibn Bishr Nihawandee) has stated that with this statement the ignominy of this aqeedah (belief) is apparent. There is no need to add any other statements. This requires pondering over the fact as to how Iblees has deceived these fools (ahmaq). Inspite of the fact that these people claim to possess absolute intelligence. Aboo Alee Seena is against them in this Aqeedah. He says, this is not so but rather Allah has the knowledge of His Nafs and also the knowledge of all other things but (Allah does not possess) the knowledge of their details.

This madh?hab has been adopted by Mu?ta?zila from these people. As if these people have conveyed additional details together.

Alhamdulillah( Allah Praise is Due to Allah) ! That Allah Ta?aala has included us amongst  that Jam?aah (Ahl-is-Sunnah) which negates and frees Allah?s Dhaat from any imperfection and ignorance and we have eeman in the Saying of Allah, the Most High:

Should not He Who has created know? And He is the Most Kind and Courteous (to His slaves) All-Aware (of everything). (Al-Mulk 67:14)  

Meaning, Does Allah not have Ilm of His creation?

And the Saying of Allah, the Most High:
And with Him are the keys of the Ghaib (all that is hidden), none knows them but He. And He knows whatever there is in (or on) the earth and in the sea; not a leaf falls, but he knows it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry, but is written in a Clear Record. (Al-An'am 6:59)

Ibn Kathir rahimahullah said,
Allah's statement,

[ ]

(And He knows whatever there is on the land and in the sea;) means, Allah's honored knowledge encompasses everything, including the creatures living in the sea and on land, and none of it, not even the weight of an atom on earth or in heaven, ever escapes His knowledge. Allah's statement,

[ ]

(not a leaf falls, but He knows it.) means, He knows the movements of everything including inanimate things. Therefore, what about His knowledge of the living creatures, especially, those whom the Divine laws have been imposed upon such as mankind and the Jinns In another Ayah, Allah said;

[ ]

(Allah knows the fraud of the eyes, and all that the breasts conceal.)[40:19]

And the Mu?ta?zila have adopted the view that Allah?s Ilm (knowledge) and His Qudrah is his Dhaat alone. They had this aqeedah so that they don?t have to prove two ancients. The response to this sect (Mu?ta?zila) is that the Ancient is only Allah?s Dhaat which possesses the Attributes of absolute perfection??

Jarh Of Imam Ibnul-Quayyim (rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

While discussing the deviant opinions of leaders of misguided sects on Nafs, he said in Kitab-ar-Ruh, ??.Some of them presumed that the relation of an-Nafs with the body is neither like a neighbour nor due to its habitation (in the body) and nor is it due to sticking ( to the body) but rather the only judgement with regards to this is the body (alone). This is the view of Ibn Seena and others. This saying is the most rejected and very far from being valid.

[Kita bar-Ruh, Chapter 19, Haqeeqat-un-Nafs, page 278 ? Translated into Urdu by Raaghib Rahmaanee]

Ibn al-Quayyim (rahimahullah) said: ?Ibn Seena, as he stated about himself, said that he and his father were from the esoteric Karaamitah sect who do not believe in the beginning of creation, the resurrection , the Creator, nor the Messengers. Those zanaadiqah used to adopt Shee?aism and claim to be from the lineage of the Prophet?s family as a guise in order to hide their disbelief, whereas the Prophet?s family is not at all related to them with regards to lineage, their actions and their beliefs. They used to kill the people of knowledge and the people of eeman, and they would leave the people of shirk and kufr. They did not consider what is haraam to be haraam, nor what is halaal to be halaal.?
[Ighaathah Al-Lahfaan (2/266)]

In another section of his book Ibn al-Quayyim (rahimahullah) described him as ? Imaam of Mulhideen ? [Ighaathah Al-Lahfaan (2/267)]

In Miftah Daar As-Sa?adah, Ibnul-Quayyim also said about al-Farabi and Ibn Seena,

?The Muslim philosophers such as Ibn Seena and Al-Farabi tried to create a balance between philosophy and the sharee?ah, however it corrupted them and lead them to speak about matters such as miracles and extraordinary event in a manner which philosophers do. They said that there are three forces behind every miracle or extraordinary event:

1.     The orbit (of the planets)
2.     Mental Power
3.     The power of nature

Thus they equated miracles given to a prophet to that of the deception of magicians and the soothsayers. However, they claimed that the difference between the two lies only in intent; the intent of the prophets and messengers is good whereas the intent of the magicians and those that are like them is evil. This ideology is one of the most corrupted and repugnant in the world, for it is built on the concept that denies the will of Allaaah and that He has power over all things. This ideology is also built on the principle that denies the jinn, the angels, and the physical resurrection of mankind. Hence, in actuality it is built on disbelief in Allaah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement.? [Miftah Daar As-Sa?adah, (119/2)]

[Taken from : ]

Jarh Of Imam Siddeeq Hasan Khan al-Qannawjee(rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Siddeeq Hasan Khaan al-Qannawjee (rahimahullah) said about him,
? Ibn Seena said in al-Ishraat, based on the statement of the philosophers, that Allaah has knowledge of general affairs, not the specifics of things that take place, and this is clear kufr that cannot be misconstrued. This is one of the reasons why the Muslims have considered the philosophers to be kuffaar. They have many other destructive beliefs, so do not be swayed by the ideas, deep knowledge, and wisdom that they claim to have, for there is not one of them except that he contradicts the truth or he is on the brink of the fire.? [ Abdjadal-Uloom, (1/23)]

Jarh Of Imam Ibn Katheer (rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Ibn Kathir (rahimahullah) stated that it was because of his beliefs that Al-Ghazaalee made takfeer of him. [Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/46) ]

To be continued....Insha Allah!

This message was edited by abdul.azeem on 1-2-06 @ 7:02 PM

Attached FileZakirOnIbnSeena.rm (175 Kbytes)

02-01-2006 @ 12:40 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Abu Abd Ar Rahman Abd Al Adheem Ibn Faheem ibn Zia ibn Ma'een (KSA/ Bangalore, India)
Posts: 305
Joined: Nov 2002
Bismillah Alhamdulillah' As-Salatu Wa-Assalaamu Alaa Rasoolullah

Jarh Of Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) on Ibn Seena

?Moreover, whatever level a person reaches in terms of asceticism, devotion, and knowledge, but without believing in the entire message brought by Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) can never make him a believer, nor an ally of Allah, as, for example the monks and ascetics among the scholars and worshippers of the Jews and the Christians. Also, those seeming to have knowledge and devotion among the associationists of Arabia, Turkey, or India, or others among the "sages" of  India or Turkey who possess some knowledge, discipline and devotion in their religion, but are not believers in all of the message of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , are all kafir(disbelievers) and enemies of Allah. This, even though many may believe them to be allies (awliyaa') of Allah. Thus, the sages of the Persian Zoroastrians are all kafir, as well as the sages of Greece such as Aristotle and those like him. They were associationists, worshipping idols and the planets.  

Aristotle was before 'Isa (Jesus) by three hundred years, and was a minister for Alexander son of Phillips the Macedonian, who is mentioned in the histories of Rome and Greece, as well as the histories of the Christians and the Jews. He is not, however, the same as the man named Dhu l-Qarnain who Allah mentioned in His book, as some imagined. Some people mistakenly thought that Aristotle was a minister for dhu-l-qarnain, when they saw that (the one found in the Western histories) was named Alexander, and the names are similar, they thought that they were one in the same man. This mistaken view has been promulgated by Ibn Seena and some others with him.

In an other place Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) also said:

Some of them may try to say, as Ibn Arabi said, that they take from the same source from which the angel who used to give the revelation to Muhammad(Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) took. This is because they have taken on the belief system of the philosophers, then presented it in the form of "mysticism" and inspiration. The philosophers say: "The universe is ancient, without beginning, and there is an origin which they imitate and resemble."

As Aristotle and his followers said: "The first of it is the prime mover.", or as the later ones say as well, such as Ibn Seena (a kafir who believed fully in the atheistic philosophy of the ancient Greeks and posed as a Muslim succeeding in infiltrating his heretical ideas into the Muslim nation).

They do not say that the universe belongs to a Lord who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six periods, nor that He created all things by His will and His power, nor that He knows all of the details in the universe. No, they either deny His knowledge altogether, as did Aristotle, or they say: Of the changing, moving things He knows only the generalities, as did Ibn Seena. In reality, there is no difference between the two statements.

Ibn Seena has also denied the knowledge of Allah just as Aristotle did. Every real existing thing is specific containing many detailed characteristics. Each of these characteristics is a "detail". This is the case for all things, their characteristics and their actions. Whoever does not know the "details" and knows only "generalities" knows nothing about the universe. Generalities exist only in the mind, not in reality.

This subject has been dealt with extensively elsewhere, in my book "A Rebuttal of the Idea of a Conflict Between Reason and Revelation" among other places. The kufr (disbelief) of these people is greater than the kufr of the Jews and the Christians and, in fact greater than the kufr of the idol-worshippers of pre-Islamic Arabia! All of these groups say that Allah created the heavens and the earth, and that He created the creation by His will and His power.

Aristotle and others like him among the philosophers or among the Greeks used to worship the stars and idols. They knew about the angels and the prophets, but nothing of this appears in the writings of Aristotle, most of their studies and sciences were involved in the natural sciences. As for issues of theology, all of them were very rarely correct, often mistaken. The Jews and the Christians even after the changing and distortion of these messages were much more knowledgeable of theological realities than the philosophers. The later philosophers, however, such as Ibn Seena and others attempted to make up a contrived concoction consisting of the ideas of the philosophers mixed with some of the message of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam). They took some things from the principles of various deviant sects such as the Jahmiya and the Mu'tazilah, and put together a school of thought to which philosophers of many different traditions could trace their origins. In it are gross contradictions and corruption of the truth, some of which I have analyzed elsewhere.

When these people looked at the matter of the prophets such as Musa and 'Isa and Muhammad, and the immense effect they had on the world, they acknowledged the revealed law with which Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam)was sent - the greatest such law ever to come to the world. Then they found that the prophets taught about the angels and the jinn. They wanted to bring together this and the teachings of their predecessors and real teachers: the Greek philosophers, the farthest of Allah's creation from the knowledge of Allah, His angels, His books, His prophets, and the Last Day. They have said that there are ten beings or intellects, which they call isolations or separations.

This terminology is derived from the separation of the soul from the body. They called them "separations" because of their separation from the physical world, and their isolation from it. They ascribed to each heavenly body a soul, most of them considered them manifestations or "form", while others considered them to be essences or "substance". Upon analysis, it is clear that these "isolations" are in reality things which exist only in the mind, and not in external reality, just as the imaginary numbers established by the students of Pythagoras, and the abstract Platonian analogies developed by the students of Plato. They established the idea of the "helium" abstracted from external appearances, as well as time and space as purely abstract concepts. Even the more astute among the philosophers have admitted that such things only have reality in the mind, and not in the world outside of the mind. When the later followers of these philosophers, such as Ibn Seena, decided that they wanted to prove the existence of prophethood based on their corrupt underlying concepts, they imagined that prophethood entails three special characteristics, whoever possesses them is a prophet:

1) That the person posses "mind power", which they call the sacred power, and its meaning is that such people can obtain knowledge without normal processes of learning.
2) That he possess "imaginative power", such that he imagines clearly the products of his own mind, and sees them as visions in his minds eye, and hears within himself voices, just as the dreamer hears and sees things which have no existence in external reality. They imagined that these visions of the imaginations are the angels, and those voices are the words of Allah Ta'ala!
3) That he possess "dynamic power" with which he is able to influence the substances of the physical world. They believed that the miracles of the prophets, and the karaamaat (miraculous occurrences) granted to Allah's allies, and the amazing feats of the sorcerers are all part of the strength of the self. Thus, they only accepted of these that which fit into their principles such as the stick turning into a snake, while they rejected all others such as the splitting of the moon mentioned in the Qur'an, and others like it.

I have written extensively about these people and their beliefs elsewhere, explaining that their beliefs are the most corrupt of beliefs. These things which they call one of the signs of the prophets (i.e. the miracles which they accept as having happened) are accomplished by average people along with even greater things, as they are accomplished by the followers of the prophets. The angels who brought the messages to the prophets are living, speaking beings and one of the greatest creations of Allah......


[Source: Al-Farq Baynal-Awliyaa?ir-Rahmaan wa Awliyaa-ish-Shaythaan by Imam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah]

02-01-2006 @ 1:22 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Abu Abd Ar Rahman Abd Al Adheem Ibn Faheem ibn Zia ibn Ma'een (KSA/ Bangalore, India)
Posts: 305
Joined: Nov 2002
Bismillah Alhamdulillah' As-Salatu Wa-Assalaamu Alaa Rasoolullah

Jarh Of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) On Ibn Seena

Aqeedah of Ibn Seena - Al-Lawh Al-Mahfooz Is Celestial Soul! - Beings Come Into Existance due to movement of Spheres! And Allaah The Most High Cannot Distinguish Ibraaheem From Musa From Muhammad (Salwathullaahi Was-Salamuhu Alay) !!!

The Materialists and Philosophers

Similarly, the Materialists (al-Dahiriyya) - the materialist philosophers and other -some of them deny a Maker for the world, like the view manifested by Pharaoh - may Allah curse him! Others amongst them, like Aristotle and his followers, hold for a Cause of the movement of the celestial spheres which[movement] is attendant upon it. Still others among them, like Ibn Seena and al-Suhrawardi - the one killed in Aleppo - and the would be-philosophers of the [three] religions like them, hold for the necessity of the essence prerequisite for the heavenly spheres.

Difference between the Pagan Arabs and the Materialist Philosophers

The pagan Arabs used to hold that Allaah was able to act according to His Will and to answer the prayer of the one who prayed to Him, but according to these materialist philosophers Allaah does not do a thing by His Will, nor dies He answer the prayer of the one who prays. Rather, He does not know the particulars, nor does He distinguish this supplicant from that. He does not know Abraham from Moses from Muhammad from others of His greatest Messengers. There are even those among them like Aristotle and his followers who deny His knowledge absolutely, while others like Ibn Seena and those like him state He only knows universals...[Part-2, Page 14]

Refuting the Philosophers

It is obvious that everything existant in external reality is a specific particular. If, therefore, He does not know anything but universals, He does not know a thing of specific existent being - neither celestial spheres, nor sovereigns, nor anything else of existing beings in their real natures. Among them prayer is the manipulation on the part of a powerful Soul upon the matter of the universe, as say Ibn Seena and those like him. They claim that the Inscribed Tablet (al-Lawh al-Mahfuz) is the celestial Soul, and that all things coming into being in time on earth occur only from the movement of the spheres, as has been elaborated in the refutation of them elsewhere...

[Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) in Aj-Jawab as-Saheeh ]
[Source: ]

05-01-2006 @ 11:08 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Abu Abd Ar Rahman Abd Al Adheem Ibn Faheem ibn Zia ibn Ma'een (KSA/ Bangalore, India)
Posts: 305
Joined: Nov 2002
Bismillah Alhamdulillah' As-Salatu Wa-Assalaamu Alaa Rasoolullah

Shaikh Abdul-Azeez Ar-Raajihee On Those Who Dont Declare The Likes Of Ibn Seena To Be Kaafir!!

Question: With respect to the rule on Takfeer, whoever does not hold the polytheists to be disbelievers, such as Ibn Sinaa (Avicenna), a person comes along and says: ?I do not hold Ibn Seenaa to be a disbeliever, he is a Muslim to me.? Does this person commit disbelief?

Answer: If he is confused about him and is not aware of his condition, he does not commit disbelief until his (Ibn Seenaa?s) affair is first made clear to him. However, the one who knows that he is a disbeliever and that he is a heretic but yet does not deem him to be a disbeliever, this person falls under this Nullifier of Islaam. But this matter has not been made clear to some people, so the one who is not aware of his condition, his affair should be clarified to him.

Question: [Continuing] But if he rejects and says: ?I am not required to do this.?

Answer: He is required to do this. This means that he has fallen into one of these Nullifiers of Islaam: ?Whoever does not consider the polytheists to be disbelievers, or has doubts about their disbelief or considers their ways and beliefs to be correct, then he has committed disbelief.? You are required to hold the polytheists as disbelievers, make enmity with them and
hates them for the sake of Allaah. Allaah has made this required upon you. Allaah has made Tawheed a requirement upon you. And there is no Tawheed unless one holds the polytheists to be disbelievers. Whoever does not hold the polytheists to be disbelievers or has doubts about their disbelief or holds their ways and beliefs to be correct, this person is a disbeliever just like them, because he does not reject the Taaghoot. Whoever does not disbelieve and reject the Taaghoot does not believe in Allaah.

His Faith in Allaah and Tawheed is not correct unless there are two things:

(1) Rejecting the false deities/religions, and
(2) Having faith in Allaah. Rejecting the false deities/religion (Taaghoot) is what Allaah began with first in Laa Ilaaha IllaaAllaah [There is no deity worthy of worship except Allaah]. Laa Ilaaha [There is no deity worthy of worship] is a rejection of the false deities/religions.

[Source: Explanation of The Nullifiers of Islaam Of the Imaam and Mujaddid
- Muhammad bin ?Abdil-Wahhaab - By Shaikh Abdul-Azeez bin Abdillaah Ar-Raajihee -]

03-05-2008 @ 9:57 PM    Notify Admin about this post
unspecified ساجد (Mumbai (India))
Posts: 2031
Joined: Jul 2005

wa salaamu alaykum,

TawhidFirst | Aqidah | AboveTheThrone | Asharis
Madkhalis | Takfiris | Maturidis | Dajjaal
Islam Against Extremism | Manhaj
Ibn Taymiyyah | Bidah
Genitive Case in Arabic Grammar good resource

main page | contact us
Copyright 2001 - SalafiTalk.Net
Madinah Dates Gold Silver Investments