> Do you read these Philosophers?

[HamzaTR]

Assalao Alaikom
Just wondering if you read about Abo Ali Siina (Avicenna), Sohrevardi, Omar Khayyam, Hafez Shirazi, Imam Ghazali, Sheikh Sadi and Razi?

I just read that World's Muslim luminaries will discuss on them.

World’s Muslim scholars to discuss philosophy in Iran�|�İslâmi Davet – English News

and i wonder if my brothers on Islamic Life read them? What do you think? Feel free to answer. Thanks

[Aayah]

I do read some about Abu-Baker Ar-Razi, Al-Ghazali, and Omar Khayyam in Arabic. I think its great to have their books in other languages to show the world the greatness of Muslims knowledge during their peak time.

I wonder if the event will be published in any site.

[al-boriqee]

I think the actual name in arabic is Sahrawardi instead of "Sohrevardi"

as for the conference. I would like some way for someone to post avideo of it here, just to merely acquaint ourselves with it. If they are going totalk about the advancement of sciences and medicine, then that is fine. If they are going to talk about how philosophy affected doctrine, it would not be fine.

[amar_labedi]

Asalamalaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

It would be nice if someone post it here so that we can come to know what is happening .

[HamzaTR]

wa alikum salam
thanks brother al-boriqee for information
and I'm happy to see my brothers've read or know about them. mashaallah
well, I think we will wait for october for the event to be published..

[al-boriqee]

Don;t get me wrong

I don't mind their accomplishments in the various fields of science. But we disregard their aqeeda of kufr, particularly the philosophers like Ibn Sina whom everyone made takfir of. These people use to regard the philosophers better than the prophets, denied the day of judgment claiming it was a fairy tales or fables, denied qadr, denied everything about Allah except in their idea about the "first cause"

THE ONLY PHILOSOPHER WHOM i FOUND TO BE SALEEM in aqeedah was Ibn Rushd.

[HamzaTR]

How can we get you right brother?
We don't care the EVERYONE you say making takfir of them. "Man is the enemy of what he doesn't know" says Imam Ali (r.a).
We don't want to be an enemy of whom we don't know. So, let's read their books first. Then, the eveyone you are talking about.
In Turkey I saw a cute boy cursing a luminary I love very much. And I asked him if he knows his life or read his book. He answered: "Never. I won't read any book from him as he believes so and so.." And, I relaized that some people who claim to be his followers misguided him and I corrected the misunderstanding.
I believe that, a scholar has to known via his books, sayings, accomplishments not only by his followers or rejecters' thoughts.
Even, reading their own books is not enough. We have to know the conditions in their time, etc..
In Turkish there is a proverb I like very much; "Cursing is easy but praying is difficult (to the self). So, curse not, make prayers."

[al-boriqee]

Imaam adh-Dhahabee on Ibn Sina

وله كتاب الشفاء وغيره وأشياء لا تحتمل وقد كفره الغزالي في كتاب المنقذ من الضلال

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.”

قد سقت في تاريخ الإسلام أشياء اختصرتها وهو رأس الفلاسفة الإسلامية لم يأت بعد الفارابي مثله فالحمد لله على الإسلام والسنة

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)

Ibn Hajr on Ibn Sina

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)]

Ibnul-Jawzee on Ibn Sina

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.

Haafidh Shams-Deen Ibnul-Qayyim on Ibn Sina

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)]


Imaam Sideeq Hasan Khan on Ibn Sina

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)]


Shayhul-Islam Ibnu-Taymiyyah on Ibn Sina


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]

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 ]

there is more on the topic than meets the eye and it is beyond the etiquette of holding to the truth to brush these realities aside based on observations of claimed ignorance where just because you don't know a thing exonerates the people in question.

This is merely an educational informational thing for you to be aware about some of the theological positions that it is well known that Ibn Sina and Farabi took.

I think you need to hear the following video lecture

the first 20 some odd minutes deal with the history of philosophers in our history

PERFECT JUSTICE: Debunking the Male Bias Myth - by Yasir Qadhi

PERFECT JUSTICE: Debunking the Male Bias Myth - by Yasir Qadhi

[HamzaTR]

I repeat: "I believe that, a scholar has to known via his books, sayings, accomplishments not only by his followers or rejecters' thoughts."
I don't care what your wahabi-like everyone says :)

[al-boriqee]

He is known through his books and his sayings and this is what we come to know of him from his own books and his own sayings.

I don't think inventing an imaginary madhaab or sect is allowed on the forum