Professional Documents
Culture Documents
“The best thing they showed openly was ar-Rafdh (being Raafhidah Shiites), while they concealed
pure, absolute disbelief inwardly.” [1]
Ibn Taymiyyah confirmed this by mentioning that Ibn Sina himself identified his own family, his
father, and his brother to all be from this severely deviant group that was exposed and declared
outside of Islam by many scholars.
Ibn Taymiyyah further detailed how Ibn Sina attempted to blend what he learned from the deviant
claimants to Islam, the Mu’tazliah and Raafidhah, with the polytheistic philosophy of Aristotle,
and when he did so he deviated even further, inventing new sets of beliefs so blasphemous that
they surpassed some of the falsehood of the Jahmiyyah and even the pagan philosophers
themselves! [2]
After listing a number of Ibn Sina’s philosophical deviations, Ibn Taymiyyah went on to say:
No one says these things other than the most ignorant of people, the most astray, and those who
most resemble farm animals! [3]
He (Ibn Sina) was from the Qaraamitah Baatiniyyah [Sect], those who do not believe in a
beginning (of the creation) nor an end, nor do they believe in a Lord of the creation, nor any
prophet sent from Allaah, the Most High.
Such deviant hypocrites (zanaadiqah) pretend to be Raafidhah, whilst they conceal pure, absolute
disbelief inwardly, claiming to be descendants of the family of the Messenger (may Allaah raise
his rank and grant him and his family peace). He and his family are all free of them in terms of
both lineage and religion… [4]
Ibn al-Qayyim also referred to Ibn Sina as the imaam of the severe deviants ()إمام المهحدين, and
said, “This deviant and his followers are disbelievers in Allaah, the Angels, the Books, the
Messengers, and the Last Day.” [5] Read this article to find out how he came to this conclusion.
Comparing Ibn Sina’s and other philosophers’ disbelief to that of the pagan Arabs of pre-Islamic
Makkah, he concluded that the beliefs of the pagan Arabs were less offensive than the beliefs of
Ibn Sina and the philosophers. [6]
He further compared the blasphemy of the most deviant of the Jahmiyyah cults to the ideas of Ibn
Sina and concluded that Ibn Sina’s beliefs were even more deviant.[7]
After explaining how Ibn Sina denied basic pillars of belief, he concluded with the verdict:
وال رسو وال كتاب، وال معاد، ال مبدأ عنده،فالره معط مبرك هاحد لهنبوات والمعاد
The man was a denier (of Allaah’s Attributes), a polytheist, a rejecter of matters related to
prophethood and the Ma’aad (the Last Day), having no belief in the beginning or end of creation,
nor any belief in a messenger or a book. [8]
For those who wish for more specific information on the heretical blasphemy of Ibn Sina, they are
welcome to investigate the detailed documentation of how he rejected each pillar of Faith, one by
one, explained by Ibn al-Qayyim himself. [9]
Thus, the scholars of his time and those after him whose statements are relied upon in all matters
have spoken decisively about his disbelief and the disbelief of Aboo Nasr al-Farabi as well, due to
their positions on these matters in contradiction to the beliefs of the Muslims. [10]
One of today’s senior scholars, a member of the Permanent Committee for Research and Fatwaa
in Saudi Arabia, Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan (may Allaah preserve him), was asked about
someone who praises Ibn Sina and lists him among the scholars of Islam. He replied:
He is one of two cases:
1. He may be ignorant, and thus he does not know about the condition of Ibn Sina. Such a person
has no right to speak, rather he must keep silent.
2. Or perhaps he knows about Ibn Sina and his teachings of disbelief and he agrees with him,
praising him for that reason. In this case, his ruling is the same ruling as Ibn Sina (i.e.
disbeliever), and refuge with Allah is sought. This is because he has agreed with him and praised
him for that (his disbelief).
So this is a very serious issue!
However, some people may praise Ibn Sina strictly because he was a doctor. This is a worldly
profession, and he was really a doctor. However, there were many non-Muslim doctors more
proficient in the medical field than him, so why the specific focus on Ibn Sina? They say:
“Because he ascribed to Islam, and so this is something for Muslims to be proud of.”
We say: Islam is free from him, and Islam does not need him!
To conclude: He is not to be praised or spoken of highly because he was one of the Baatiniyyah
[Cult], a severely deviant philosopher who claimed that the universe may be infinite (having no
beginning or end). [11]
Also, Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ar-Raajihee explained why Muslims who know about him are
required to consider him a disbeliever. [click here]
Naming Schools and Hospitals After Ibn Sina?
Additionally, Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan, Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, and others mentioned that it is
not permissible to name schools, hospitals, or health clinics after him (in his honor). [click here]
Modern Attempts to Include Ibn Sina Among the Muslim Scientists
Muslims today may come across unreliable websites and other sources of misinformation
claiming that Ibn Sina was a great Muslim scientist and/or scholar. Some clinics and schools in
the Muslim lands are even named after him to honor him, which is not permissible, as mentioned
by Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan.
What exactly is the cause of this serious mistake? It could be rooted in one or any number of the
following causes:
Arabic :
:الجواب
إما إنه جاهل وال يدري عن حال ابن سينا ،وهذا ال يحق ][1
.له أن يتكلم ،بل يجب عليه أن يسكت
مقرا له على ][2
وإما إنه عالم بحال ابن سينا وكفرياته ،فيكون ًّ
ذلك ،فيكون حكمه مثل حكم ابن سينا ،والعياذ باهلل؛ ألنه أقره
.على ذلك وزكاه
لكن بعض الناس يثني على ابن سينا من ناحية أنه طبيب فقط،
وهذه حرفة دنيوية ،هو طبيب ،وفي الكفار من هو أحذق منه
في الطب ،فلماذا يخص ابن سينا؟ يقولون :ألنه ينتسب
.لإلسالم ،وهذا مفخرة لإلسالم