(Discussion of Ibn Sina and his belief in the eternal succession of the world, and his resemblance to the hypocrites in this belief) And Ibn Sina came after that, a flatterer*** to the Muslims
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And Ibn Sina came after that, a flatterer *** to the Muslims"
A flatterer to them, meaning: seeking their favor, because Ibn Sina claims to be a Muslim, and if he is a Muslim by his claim, he would not bring a statement that contradicts what the Muslims are upon, so he brought a statement in which he flatters them, and he said:
"And he said in possibility" meaning: the possibility of the creation of this world, and that the world can be created, and the philosophers before him, Aristotle and his followers, say: Is the world what? Eternal, it cannot be created, but Ibn Sina came and said:
"And he said in possibility
But it is the eternal, not created *** it was not non-existent, nor is it vanishing"
What is this statement? He says it is possible that it is created, but it is eternal, so what is the difference between him and the philosophers? The philosophers say it is impossible for it to be created, and he says: it is possible but it is not created, so the difference between him and them is that he says it is possible that it is created, and they say it is not possible, what do the Muslims say? They say it is obligatory that it is created, because everything other than Allah is created after it was non-existent, so this man became like the hypocrites, not with these and not with these, he is not the one who said with the statement of the philosophers that its being created is possible, nor with the statement of the Muslims that its being created is what? Obligatory, but he said it is possible, but with that it is eternal, not created. "It was not non-existent" this is the succession in the past, "nor is it vanishing" the succession in the future.
A flatterer to them, meaning: seeking their favor, because Ibn Sina claims to be a Muslim, and if he is a Muslim by his claim, he would not bring a statement that contradicts what the Muslims are upon, so he brought a statement in which he flatters them, and he said:
"And he said in possibility" meaning: the possibility of the creation of this world, and that the world can be created, and the philosophers before him, Aristotle and his followers, say: Is the world what? Eternal, it cannot be created, but Ibn Sina came and said:
"And he said in possibility
But it is the eternal, not created *** it was not non-existent, nor is it vanishing"
What is this statement? He says it is possible that it is created, but it is eternal, so what is the difference between him and the philosophers? The philosophers say it is impossible for it to be created, and he says: it is possible but it is not created, so the difference between him and them is that he says it is possible that it is created, and they say it is not possible, what do the Muslims say? They say it is obligatory that it is created, because everything other than Allah is created after it was non-existent, so this man became like the hypocrites, not with these and not with these, he is not the one who said with the statement of the philosophers that its being created is possible, nor with the statement of the Muslims that its being created is what? Obligatory, but he said it is possible, but with that it is eternal, not created. "It was not non-existent" this is the succession in the past, "nor is it vanishing" the succession in the future.