ibnu sina

ISI KANDUNGAN

Latar Belakang Ibnu Sina

Ensiklopedia Kedoktoran Pertama

Teori-teori Anatomi Dan Fisiologi

Pengaruh Ibnu Sina

Terjemahan Dan Bahan Rujukan Al-Qanun Fit-Tibb

Perintis Pengenalan Penyakit Saraf

Penemuan-Penemuan Baru

Bidang Geografi

Bidang Geologi ,Kimia Dan Kosmologi

Sumbangan Ibnu Sina

Penutup

IBNU SINA – TOKOH PERUBATAN ISLAM.

Latar Belakang Ibnu Sina

IBNU SINA yang lebih dikenali di Barat dengan nama Avicenna mempunyai nama lengkap Abu Ali al- Huseyn bin Abdullah bin Hassan Ali bin Sina. Beliau merupakan seorang yang berbangsa Parsi. Menurut Ibnu Abi Ushaybi’ah ia lahir pada tahun 375 H, di desa Afshanah dekat kota Kharmaitan Propinzi Bukhara Afghanistan.

Pelajaran pertama yang diterimanya pada zaman kanak-kanak adalah Al-Quran dan sastera yang didapati olehnya secara tidak formal. Ia mula belajar pada usia 5 tahun. Sementara itu sewaktu berumur 10 tahun , beliau telah berjaya menghafal Al-Quran. Pada masa umurnya meningkat 18 tahun Ibnu Sina telah menjadi "Doktor Di Raja". Disamping itu, Ibnu Sina jiga telah menguasai seluruh cabang ilmu pengetahuan yang ada pada waktu itu. Ilmu-ilmu agama seperti tafsir, fiqh, perbandingan agama (ushuluddin), tasawuf dan sebagainya sudah dikuasainya ketika baru berusia 10 tahun. Pada masa kecilnya, ia dibimbing dan dididik oleh Abu Abdullah Natili, seorang sahabat karib ayahnya, dan ayahnya sendiri. Antara bidang ilmu yang berjaya dikuasainya termasuklah dalam bidang falsafah, kedoktoran, geometri, astronomi, muzik, syair, teologi, politik, matematik, fizik, kimia, sastera dan kosmologi.

Ensiklopedia Kedoktoran Pertama

Pada usia 21 tahun, ketika berada di Kawarazm, ia mulai menulis karyanya yang pertama yang berjudul "Al-Majmu" yang mengandungi berbagai ilmu pengetahuan yang lengkap.Kemudian ia melanjutkan menulis buku-buku lain.Nama-nama buku yang pernah dikarang Ibnu Sina, termasuk yang berbentuk risalah ukuran kecil, dimuat dan di himpun dalam satu buku besar yang berjudul "Essai de Bibliographie Avicenna" yang dihasilkan oleh Pater Dominican di Kairo.Antara yang terkandung dalam buku tersebut termasuklah buku karangan yang amat terkenal iaitu Al-Qanun Fit – Tibb.

Teori-Teori Anatomi Dan Fisiologi

Teori-teori anatomi dan fisiologi dalam buku-buku beliau adalah menggambarkan analogi manusia terhadap negara dan mikrokosmos (dunia kecil) terhadap alam semester sebagai makrokosmos (dunia besar).Misalnya digambarkan bahawa syurga kayangan adalah bulat dan bumi adalah persegi dan dengan demikian kepala itu bulat dan kaki itu empat persegi. Terdapat empat musim dan 12 bulan dalam setahun, dengan itu manusia memiliki empat tangkai dan lengan (anggota badan) mempunyai 12 tulang sendi. Hati (heart) adalah ‘pangeran’-nya tubuh manusia, sementera paru-paru adalah ‘menteri’-nya. Leher merupakan ‘jendela’-nya sang badan, manakala kandung empedu sebagai ‘markas pusat’-nya. Limpa dan perut sebagai ‘bumbung’ sedangkan usus merupakan sistem komunikasi dan sistem pembuangan.

Sementara itu "Canon of Medicine" memuatkan pernyataan yang tegas bahawa "darah mengalir secara terus-menerus dalam suatu lingkaran dan tak pernah berhenti" . Namun ini belum dapat dianggap sebagai suatu penemuan tentang srikulasi darah, kerana bangsa cina tidak membezakan antara urat-urat darah halus (Veins) dengan pembuluh nadi (arferies). Analogi tersebut hanyalah analogi yang digambarkan antara gerakan darah dan siklus alam semesta, pergantian musim dan gerakan-gerakan tubuh tanpa peragaan secara empirik pada keadaan yang sebenarnya.

Pengaruh Ibnu Sina (Avicenna)

Pengaruh Ibnu Sina sebagai seorang failasuf dan doktor perubatan dalam kebudayaan Eropah adalah luas. Buku karangannya al-Qanun Fit- Tibb (Peraturan Perubatan) terdiri daripada 14 jilid, telah dianggap sebagai himpunan perbendaharaan ilmu perubatan. Ilmu perubatan moden banyak mendapat pelajaran daripada Ibnu Sina, dari segi pengunaan ubat, diagnosis dan pembedahan.

Terjemahan Dan Bahan Rujukan al-Qanun Fit- Tibb

Pada abad ke 12 M Gerard Cremona yang berpindah ke Toledo, Sepanyol telah menterjemahkan buku Ibnu Sina ke bahasa Latin. Buku ini menjadi buku rujukan utama di universiti-universiti Eropah hingga 1500 M. Bukunya telah disalin (cetak ) sebanyak 16 kali dan 15 edisi dalam bahasa Latin dan sebuah edisi dalam bahasa Yahudi (Hebrew).Disamping itu buku tersebut turut diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Inggeris, Perancis , Sepanyol dan Itali . Pada abad ke 16 M , buku ini dicetak 21 kali.

Al-Qanun Fit-Tibb juga digunakan sebagai buku teks kedoktoran di berbagai universiti di Perancis. Misalnya di Sekolah Tinggi Kedoktoran Montpellier dan Louvin telah menggunakannya sebagai bahan rujukan pada abad ke 17 M. Sementara itu Prof. Phillip K. Hitpi telah menganggap buku tersebut sebagai "Ensiklopedia Kedoktoran".

Penulis- penulis Barat telah menganggap Ibnu Sina sebagai ‘Bapa Doktor’ kerana Ibnu Sina telah menyatupadukan teori perubatan Yunani Hippocrates dan Galen dan pengalaman dari ahli-ahli perubatan dari India dan Parsi dan pengalaman beliau sendiri.

Perintis Pengenalan Penyakit Saraf

Al- Qanun Fit-Tibb telah membincangkan serta mengenegahkan mengenai penyakit saraf. Buku tersebut juga telah mengajar mengenai cara-cara pembedahan dimana telah menekankan keperluan pembersihan luka. Malahan di dalam buku-buku tersebut juga dinyatakan keterangan –keterangan dengan lebih jelas di samping hiasan gambar-gambar dan sketsa-sketsa yang sekaligus menunjukkan pengetahuan anatomi Ibnu Sina yang luas.

Ibnu Sina- Sebagai Seorang Doktor.

Ibnu Sina pernah di beri gelaran sebagai "Medicorum Principal" atau "Raja Diraja Doktor" oleh kaum Latin Skolastik. Antara gelaran lain yang pernah diberikan kepadanya adalah sebagai "Raja Ubat". Malahan dalam dunia Islam, ia dianggap sebagai "Zenith", puncak tertinggi dalam ilmu kedoktoran . Ibnu Sina menjadi "Doktor Di Raja" iaitu doktor kepada Sultan Nuh 11 bin Mansur di Bukhara pada tahun 378 H/ 997 M iaitu ketika beliau berusia 18 tahun. Pada waktu itu penyakit sultan dalam keadaan parah dan tidak ada doktor lain yang berjaya mengubati baginda. Akan tetapi berkat pertolongan Ibnu Sina baginda kembali pulih.

Penemuan-Penemuan Baru

Ibnu Sina dikenali sebagai seorang saintis yang banyak memberikan saham terhadap dunia ilmu pengetahuan melalui penemuan-penemuan barunya. Antara sumbangan beliau adalah di dalam bidang geografi, geologi, kimia dan kosmologi.

Bidang Geografi

Ibnu Sina merupakan seorang ahli geografi yang mampu menerangkan bagaimana sungai-sungai berhubungan dan berasal dari gunung-ganang dan lembah-lembah. Malahan ia mampu mengemukakan suatu hipotesis atau teori pada waktu itu di mana gagal dilakukan oleh ahli Yunani dan Romani sejak dari Heredotus, Aristoteles sehinggalah Protolemaious. Menurut Ibnu Sina " gunung-ganang yang memang letaknya tinggi iaitu lingkungan mahupun lapisannya dari kulit bumi, maka apabila ia diterajang lalu berganti rupa dikarenkan oleh sungai-sungai yang meruntuhkan pinggiran-pinggirannya. Akibat proses seperti ini, maka terjadilah apa yang disebut sebagai lembah-lembah."

Bidang Geologi, Kimia Dan Kosmologi

Sumbangan Ibnu Sina dalam bidang geologi , kimia serta kosmologi memang tidak dapat di sangsikan lagi. Menurut A.M.A shushtery, karangan Ibnu Sina mengenai ilmu pertambangan (mineral) menjadi sumber geologi di Eropah. Dalam bidang kimia , ia juga meninggalkan penemuan-penemuan yang bermanafaat . Menurut Reuben Levy, Ibnu Sina telah menerangkan bahawa benda-benda logam sebenarnya berbeza antara satu dengan yang lain. Setiap logam terdiri dari berbagai jenis. Penerangan tersebut telah memperkembangkan ilmu kimia yang telah dirintis sebelumnya oleh Jabbir Ibnu Hayyan , Bapa Kimia Muslim. Sebahagian daripada karyanya yang dapat dicatat disini adalah daripada :

1.Bidang logika "Isaguji", "The Isagoge", ilmu logika Isagoge.

2.Fi Aqsam al-Ulum al-Aqliyah (On the Divisions of the Rational Sciences) tentang pembahagian ilmu-ilmu rasional.

3.Bidang metafizika , "Ilahiyyat" (Ilmu ketuhanan)

4.Bidang psikologi , "Kitab an-Nayat" (Book of Deliverence) buku tentang kebahagiaan jiwa.

5. Fiad-Din yang telah diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Latin menjadi "Liber de Mineralibus" yakni tentang pemilikan (mimeral).

6.Bidang sastera arab "Risalah fi Asab Huduts al-Huruf" ,risalah tentang sebab-sebab terjadinya huruf.

7.Bidang syair dan prosa "Al-Qasidah al- Aniyyah" syair-syair tentang jiwa manusia.

8.Cerita-cerita roman fiktif , "Risalah ath-Thayr" cerita seekor burung.

9.Bidang politik "Risalah as-Siyasah" (Book on Politics) – Buku tentang politik.

Sumbangan Ibnu Sina

Ibnu Sina telah memperkembangkan ilmu psikologi dalam perubatan dan membuat beberapa perjumpaan dalam ilmu yang dikenali hari ini sebagai ilmu perubatan psikosomatics "psychosomatic medicine". Beliau memperkembangkan ilmu diagnosis melalui denyutan jantung (pulse diagnosis) untuk mengenal pasti dalam masa beberapa detik sahaja ketidak - seimbangan humor yang berkenaan . Diagnosis melalui denyutan jantung ini masih dipratikkan oleh para hakim (doktor-doktor muslim) di Pakistan, Afghanistan dan Parsi yang menggunakan ilmu perubatan Yunani. Seorang doktor tabii dari Amerika (1981) melapurkan bahawa para hakim di Afghanistan, China, India dan Parsi sanggat berkebolehan dalam denyutan jantung di tempat yang dirasai tetapi mutunya yang pelbagai .Ini merangkumi :

1. Kuat atau denyutan yang lemah.
2. Masa antara denyutan.
3. Kandungannya lembap di paras kulit dekat denyutan itu dan lain-lain lagi.

Dari ukuran-ukuran denyutan jantung seseorang hakim mungkin mengetahui dengan tepat penyakit yang dihinggapi di dalam tubuh si pesakit.

Ibnu Sina menyedari kepentingan emosi dalam pemulihan. Apabila pesakit mempunyai sakit jiwa disebabkan oleh pemisahan daripada kekasihnya , beliau boleh mendapati nama dan alamat kekasihnya itu melalui cara berikut:

Caranya adalah untuk menyebut banyak nama dan mengulanginya dan semasa itu jarinya diletakkan atas denyutan (pulse) apabila denyutan itu terjadi tidak teratur atau hampir-hampir berhenti , seseorang itu hendaklah mengulang proses tersebut. Dengan cara yang sedemikan , nama jalan , rumah dan keluarga disebutkan. Selepas itu , kata Ibnu Sina "Jika anda tidak dapat mengubat penyakitnya maka temukanlah si pesakit dengan kekasihnya , menurut peraturan syariah maka buatlah".(Terjemahan). Ibnu Sina adalah doktor perubatan yang pertama mencatatkan bahawa penyakit paru-paru (plumonary tuberculosis) adalah suatu penyakit yang boleh menjangkit (contagious) dan dia menceritakan dengan tepat tanda-tanda penyakit kencing manis dan masalah yang timbul darinya. Beliau sangat berminat dalam bidang mengenai kesan akal (mind) atas jasad dan telah banyak menulis berkenaan gangguan psikologi.

Beliau telah menghasilkan 250 buah karya dan masih kekal hingga ke hari ini dan termasuklah 116 buah karyanya dalam bidang "Ilmu Perubatan. Banyak karyanya ditulis dalam bahasa Arab dan juga beberapa dalam bahasa Parsi. "Qanun Fitt Tibb" adalah karyanya yang termasyur , paling selalu dicetak di Eropah pada zaman "Renaissance". Karya Qanun itu telah mempunyai pengaruh yang asas dalam ilmu perubatan di Eropah pada zaman Renaissance dan telah menjadi buku rujukan yang utama di universiti-universiti Eropah hingga ke abad 17 M.

Penutup

Ibnu Sina meniggal dunia di Hamdan ,dalam usia 58 tahun pada bulan Ramadhan 428 H/1037 M .Ia dimakamkan di sana. Dalam rangka memperingati 1000 tanun hari kelahirannya (Fair Millenium) di Tehran pada tahun 1955 M ia telah dinobatkan sebagai "Father of Doctor" untuk selamanya-selamanya , dan di sana (Tehran) telah dibangunkan sebuah monemun sejarah untuk itu. Makam beliau di Hamdan telah di kelilingi oleh makam-makam doktor islam yang lain. Hal ini menyebabkan ahli-ahli ilmu yang terkemudian merasa megah kalau dimakamkan di tanah perkuburan di mana "zeninth" itu dimakamkan.

RUJUKAN

1. Baharudin Yatim & Sulaiman Nordin. 1997. Sains Menurut Perspektif Islam: Pusat pengajian umum UKM, Bangi.
2. Baharudin Yatim & Sulaiman Nordin. 1997. Islam Al-Quran dan Ideologi Masa Kini: Pusat Pengajian Umum UKM, Bangi
3. H. Zainal Abidin Ahmad. 1974. Ibnu Sina . Bulan Bintang Jakarta.

Books:

3. S M Afnan, Avicenna: His life and works (London, 1958).
4. M B Baratov, The great thinker Abu Ali ibn Sina (Russian) (Tashkent, 1980).
5. M B Baratov, P G Bulgakov and U I Karimov (eds.), Abu 'Ali Ibn Sina : On the 1000th anniversary of his birth (Tashkent, 1980).
6. M N Boltaev, Abu Ali ibn Sina - great thinker, scholar and encyclopedist of the Medieval East (Russian) (Tashkent, 1980).
7. W E Gohlman (ed. and trans.), The life of Ibn Sina (New York, 1974).
8. L Goodman, Avicenna (London, 1992).
9. D Gutas, Avicenna and the Aristotelian tradition (Leiden, 1988).
10. I M Muminov (ed.), al-Biruni and Ibn Sina : Correspondence (Russian) (Tashkent, 1973).
11. S H Nasr, An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines (1964).
12. B Ja Sidfar, Ibn Sina : Writers and Scientists of the East (Moscow, 1981).
13. S Kh Sirazhdinov (ed.), Mathematics and astronomy in the works of Ibn Sina, his contemporaries and successors (Russian) (Tashkent, 1981).
14. V N Ternovskii, Ibn Sina (Avicenna) 980-1037 (Russian), 'Nauka' (Moscow, 1969).
15. G W Wickens (ed.), Avicenna: Scientist and Philosopher (1952).

Articles:

16. H F Abdulla-Zade, A list of Ibn Sina's work in the natural sciences (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk Tadzhik. SSR Otdel. Fiz.-Mat. Khim. i Geol. Nauk (3)(77) (1980), 101-104.
17. M A Ahadova, The part of Ibn Sina's 'Book of knowledge' devoted to geometry (Russian), Buharsk. Gos. Ped. Inst. Ucen. Zap. Ser. Fiz.-Mat. Nauk Vyp. 1 (13) (1964), 143-205.
18. M F Aintabi, Ibn Sina : genius of Arab-Islamic civilization, Indian J. Hist. Sci. 21 (3) (1986), 217-219.
19. M A Akhadova, Some works of Ibn Sina in mathematics and physics (Russian), in Mathematics and astronomy in the works of Ibn Sina, his contemporaries and successors (Tashkent, 1981), 41-47; 156.
20. M S Asimov, The life and teachings of Ibn Sina, Indian J. Hist. Sci. 21 (3) (1986), 220-243.
21. M S Asimov, Ibn Sina in the history of world culture (Russian), Voprosy Filos. (7) (1980), 45-53; 187.
22. A K Bag, Ibn Sina and Indian science, Indian J. Hist. Sci. 21 (3) (1986), 270-275.
23. R B Baratov, Ibn Sina's views on natural science (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk Tadzhik. SSR Otdel. Fiz.-Mat. Khim. i Geol. Nauk (1)(79) (1981), 52-57.
24. D L Black, Estimation (wahm) in Avicenna : the logical and psychological dimensions, Dialogue 32 (2) (1993), 219-258.
25. O M Bogolyubov and V O Gukovich, On the thousandth anniversary of the birth of Ibn-Sina (Avicenna) (Ukrainian), Narisi Istor. Prirodoznav. i Tekhn. 29 (1983), 35-38.
26. E Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy 4 (London-New York, 1998), 647-654.
27. O V Dobrovol'skii and H F Abdulla-Zade, The astronomical heritage of Ibn Sina (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk Tadzhik. SSR Otdel. Fiz.-Mat. Khim. i Geol. Nauk (3)(77) (1980), 5-15.
28. A Ghorbani and J Hamadanizadeh, A brief biography of Abu 'Ali Sina (Ibn Sina), Bull. Iranian Math. Soc. 8 (1) (1980/81), 33-34.
29. R Glasner, The Hebrew version of 'De celo et mundo' attributed to Ibn Sina, Arabic Sci. Philos. 6 (1) (1996), 4; 6-7; 89-112.
30. N G Hairetdinova, Trigonometry in the works of al-Farabi and Ibn Sina (Russian), Voprosy Istor. Estestvoznan. i Tehn. Vyp. 3 (28) (1969), 29-31.
31. M M Hairullaev and A Zahidov, Little-known pages of Ibn Sina's heritage (correspondence and epistles of Ibn Sina) (Russian), Voprosy Filos. (7) (1980), 76-83.
32. A Kahhorov and I Hodziev, Ibn Sina - mathematician (on the occasion of the 1000th anniversary of his birth) (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk Tadzik. SSR Otdel. Fiz.-Mat. i Geolog.-Him. Nauk (3)(65) (1977), 121-124.
33. A de Libera, D'Avicenne à Averroès, et retour : Sur les sources arabes de la théorie scolastique de l'un transcendantal, Arabic Sci. Philos. 4 (1) (1994), 6-7, 141-179.
34. M E Mamura, Some aspects of Avicenna's theory of God's knowledge of particulars, J. Amer. Oriental Soc. 82 (1962), 299-312.
35. P Morewedge, Philosophical analysis and Ibn Sina's 'Essence-Existence' distinction, J. Amer. Oriental Soc. 92 (1972), 425-435.
36. H R Muzafarova, Basic planimetry concepts of Euclid's 'Elements' as presented by Qutb al-Din al Shirazi, Ibn Sina and their contemporaries (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk Tadzhik. SSR Otdel. Fiz.-Mat. Khim. i Geol. Nauk (3)(77) (1980,16-23.
37. S H Nasr, Ibn Sina's oriental philosophy, in History of Islamic philosophy (London, 1996), 247-251.
38. F Rahman, Essence and existence in Avicenna, Medieval and Renaissance Studies 4 (1958), 1-16.
39. I W Rath, Wie die Logik auf vor-Urteilen beruht : Überlegungen zu Aristoteles, zu Ibn Sina und zur modernen Logik, Conceptus 28 (72) (1995), 1-19.
40. N Rescher, Avicenna on the logic of 'conditional' propositions, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 4 (1963), 48-58.
41. A I Sabra, The sources of Avicenna's 'Usul al-Handasa' (Geometry) (Arabic), J. Hist. Arabic Sci. 4 (2) (1980), 416-404.
42. A V Sagadeev, Ibn Sina as a systematizer of medieval scientific knowledge (Russian), Vestnik Akad. Nauk SSSR (11) (1980), 91-103.
43. A S Sadykov, Ibn Sina and the development of the natural sciences (Russian), Voprosy Filos. (7) (1980), 54-61; 187.
44. H M Said, Ibn Sina as a scientist, Indian J. Hist. Sci. 21 (3) (1986), 261-269.
45. G Saliba, Ibn Sina and Abu 'Ubayd al-Juzjani : the problem of the Ptolemaic equant, J. Hist. Arabic Sci. 4 (2) (1980), 403-376.
46. A N Shamin, The works of Ibn Sina in Europe in the epoch of the Renaissance (Russian), Voprosy Istor. Estestvoznan. i Tekhn. (4) (1980), 73-76.
47. S Kh Sirazhdinov, G P Matvievskaya and A Akhmedov, Ibn Sina and the physical and mathematical sciences (Russian), Voprosy Filos. (9) (1980,) 106-111.
48. S Kh Sirazhdinov, G P Matvievskaya and A Akhmedov, Ibn Sina's role in the history of the development of the physico-mathematical sciences (Russian), Izv. Akad. Nauk UzSSR Ser. Fiz.-Mat. Nauk (5) (1980), 29-32; 99.
49. Z K Sokolovskaya, The scientific instruments of Ibn Sina (Russian), in Mathematics and astronomy in the works of Ibn Sina, his contemporaries and successors (Tashkent, 1981), 48-54; 156.
50. T Street, Tusi on Avicenna's logical connectives, Hist. Philos. Logic 16 (2) (1995), 257-268.
51. B A Tulepbaev, The scholar- encyclopedist of the medieval Orient Abu Ali Ibn Sina (Avicenna) (Russian), Vestnik Akad. Nauk Kazakh. SSR (11) (1980), 10-13.
52. A Tursunov, On the ideological collision of the philosophical and the theological (on the example of the creative work of Ibn Sina) (Russian), Voprosy Filos. (7) (1980), 62-75; 187.
53. A U Usmanov, Ibn Sina and his contributions in the history of the development of the mathematical sciences (Russian), in Mathematics and astronomy in the works of Ibn Sina, his contemporaries and successors (Tashkent, 1981), 55-58; 156.

Abu ‘Ali al-Husayn ibn Sina is better known in Europe by the Latinized name “Avicenna.” He is probably the most significant philosopher in the Islamic tradition and arguably the most influential philosopher of the pre-modern era. Born in Afshana near Bukhara in Central Asia in about 980, he is best known as a polymath, as a physician whose major work the Canon (al-Qanun fi’l-Tibb) continued to be taught as a medical textbook in Europe and in the Islamic world until the early modern period, and as a philosopher whose major summa the Cure (al-Shifa’) had a decisive impact upon European scholasticism and especially upon Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274).

Primarily a metaphysical philosopher of being who was concerned with understanding the self’s existence in this world in relation to its contingency, Ibn Sina’s philosophy is an attempt to construct a coherent and comprehensive system that accords with the religious exigencies of Muslim culture. As such, he may be considered to be the first major Islamic philosopher. The philosophical space that he articulates for God as the Necessary Existence lays the foundation for his theories of the soul, intellect and cosmos. Furthermore, he articulated a development in the philosophical enterprise in classical Islam away from the apologetic concerns for establishing the relationship between religion and philosophy towards an attempt to make philosophical sense of key religious doctrines and even analyse and interpret the Qur’an. Recent studies have attempted to locate him within the Aristotelian and Neoplatonic traditions. His relationship with the latter is ambivalent: although accepting some keys aspects such as an emanationist cosmology, he rejected Neoplatonic epistemology and the theory of the pre-existent soul. However, his metaphysics owes much to the "Amonnian" synthesis of the later commentators on Aristotle and discussions in legal theory and kalam on meaning, signification and being. Apart from philosophy, Avicenna’s other contributions lie in the fields of medicine, the natural sciences, musical theory, and mathematics. In the Islamic sciences ('ulum), he wrote a series of short commentaries on selected Qur’anic verses and chapters that reveal a trained philosopher’s hermeneutical method and attempt to come to terms with revelation. He also wrote some literary allegories about whose philosophical value recent scholarship is vehemently at odds.

His influence in medieval Europe spread through the translations of his works first undertaken in Spain. In the Islamic world, his impact was immediate and led to what Michot has called "la pandémie avicennienne." When al-Ghazali led the theological attack upon the heresies of the philosophers, he singled out Avicenna, and a generation later when the Shahrastani gave an account of the doctrines of the philosophers of Islam, he relied upon the work of Avicenna, whose metaphysics he later attempted to refute in his Struggling against the Philosophers (Musari‘at al-falasifa). Avicennan metaphysics became the foundation for discussions of Islamic philosophy and philosophical theology. In the early modern period in Iran, his metaphysical positions began to be displayed by a creative modification that they underwent due to the thinkers of the school of Isfahan, in particular Mulla Sadra (d. 1641).

1. Life and Times

Sources on his life range from his autobiography, written at the behest of his disciple ‘Abd al-Wahid Juzjani, his private correspondence, including the collection of philosophical epistles exchanged with his disciples and known as al-Mubahathat (The Discussions), to legends and doxographical views embedded in the ‘histories of philosophy’ of medieval Islam such as Ibn al-Qifti’s Ta’rikh al-hukama (History of the Philosophers) and Zahir al-Din Bayhaqi’s Tatimmat Siwan al-hikma. However, much of this material ought to be carefully examined and critically evaluated. Gutas has argued that the autobiography is a literary device to represent Avicenna as a philosopher who acquired knowledge of all the philosophical sciences through study and intuition (al-hads), a cornerstone of his epistemological theory. Thus the autobiography is an attempt to demonstrate that humans can achieve the highest knowledge through intuition. The text is a key to understanding Avicenna’s view of philosophy: we are told that he only understood the purpose of Aristotle’s Metaphysics after reading al-Farabi’s short treatise on it, and that often when he failed to understand a problem or solve the syllogism, he would resort to prayer in the mosque (and drinking wine at times) to receive the inspiration to understand – the doctrine of intuition. We will return to his epistemology later but first what can we say about his life?

Avicenna was born in around 980 in Afshana, a village near Bukhara in Transoxiana. His father, who may have been Ismaili, was a local Samanid governor. At an early age, his family moved to Bukhara where he studied Hanafi jurisprudence (fiqh) with Isma‘il Zahid (d. 1012) and medicine with a number of teachers. This training and the excellent library of the physicians at the Samanid court assisted Avicenna in his philosophical self-education. Thus, he claimed to have mastered all the sciences by the age of 18 and entered into the service of the Samanid court of Nuh ibn Mansur (r. 976-997) as a physician. After the death of his father, it seems that he was also given an administrative post. Around the turn of the millennium, he moved to Gurganj in Khwarazm, partly no doubt to the eclipse of Samanid rule after the Qarakhanids took Bukhara in 999. He then left again ‘through necessity’ in 1012 for Jurjan in Khurasan to the south in search no doubt for a patron. There he first met his disciple and scribe Juzjani. After a year, he entered Buyid service as a physician, first with Majd al-Dawla in Rayy and then in 1015 in Hamadan where he became vizier of Shams al-Dawla. After the death of the later in 1021, he once again sought a patron and became the vizier of the Kakuyid ‘Ala’ al-Dawla for whom he wrote an important Persian summa of philosophy, the Danishnama-yi ‘Ala’i (The Book of Knowledge for ‘Ala’ al-Dawla). Based in Isfahan, he was widely recognized as a philosopher and physician and often accompanied his patron on campaign. It was during one of these to Hamadan in 1037 that he died of colic. An arrogant thinker who did not suffer fools, he was fond of his slave-girls and wine, facts which were ammunition for his later detractors.

Back to Table of Contents

2. Works

Avicenna wrote his two earliest works in Bukhara under the influence of al-Farabi. The first, a Compendium on the Soul (Maqala fi’l-nafs), is a short treatise dedicated to the Samanid ruler that establishes the incorporeality of the rational soul or intellect without resorting to Neoplatonic insistence upon its pre-existence. The second is his first major work on metaphysics, Philosophy for the Prosodist (al-Hikma al-‘Arudiya) penned for a local scholar and his first systematic attempt at Aristotelian philosophy.

He later wrote three ‘encyclopaedias’encyclopedias of philosophy. The first of these is al-Shifa’ (The Cure), a work modelled on the corpus of the philosopher, namely. Aristotle, that covers the natural sciences, logic, mathematics, metaphysics and theology. It was this work that through its Latin translation had a considerable impact on scholasticism. It was solicited by Juzjani and his other students in Hamadan in 1016 and although he lost parts of it on a military campaign, he completed it in Isfahan by 1027. The other two encyclopaedias were written later for his patron the Buyid prince ‘Ala’ al-Dawla in Isfahan. The first, in Persian rather than Arabic is entitled Danishnama-yi ‘Ala’i (The Book of Knowledge for ‘Ala’ al-Dawla) and is an introductory text designed for the layman. It closely follows his own Arabic epitome of The Cure, namely al-Najat (The Salvation). The Book of Knowledge was the basis of al-Ghazali’s later Arabic work Maqasid al-falasifa (Goals of the Philosophers). The second, whose dating and interpretation have inspired debates for centuries, is al-Isharat wa’l-Tanbihat (Pointers and Reminders), a work that does not present completed proofs for arguments and reflects his mature thinking on a variety of logical and metaphysical issues. According to Gutas it was written in Isfahan in the early 1030s; according to Michot, it dates from an earlier period in Hamadan and possibly Rayy. A further work entitled al-Insaf (The Judgement) which purports to represent a philosophical position that is radical and transcends AristotelianisingAristotle’s Neoplatonism is unfortunately not extant, and debates about its contents are rather like the arguments that one encounters concerning Plato’s esoteric or unwritten doctrines. One further work that has inspired much debate is The Easterners (al-Mashriqiyun) or The Eastern Philosophy (al-Hikma al-Mashriqiya) which he wrote at the end of the 1020s and is mostly lost.

Back to Table of Contents

3. Avicenna Latinus

Avicenna’s major work, The Cure, was translated into Latin in 12th and 13th century Spain (Toledo and Burgos) and, although it was controversial, it had an important impact and raised controversies inin medieval scholastic philosophy. In certain cases the Latin manuscripts of the text predate the extant Arabic ones and ought to be considered more authoritative. The main significance of the Latin corpus lies in the interpretation for Avicennism andAvicennism, in particular forregarding his doctrines on the nature of the soul and his famous existence-essence distinction (more about that below) andbelow), along with the debates and censure that they raised in scholastic Europe, in particular in ParisEurope. This was particularly the case in Paris, where Avicennism waslater proscribed in 1210. However, the influence of his psychology and theory of knowledge upon William of Auvergne and Albertus Magnus have been noted. More significant is the impact of his metaphysics upon the work and thought of Thomas Aquinas. His other major work to be translated into Latin was his medical treatise the Canon, which remained a text-book into the early modern period and was studied in centrescenters of medical learning such as Padua.

4. Logic

Logic is a critical aspect of, and propaedeutic to, Avicennan philosophy. His logical works follow the curriculum of late Neoplatonism and comprise nine books, beginning with his version of Porphyry’s Isagoge followed by his understanding and modification of the Aristotelian Organon, which included the Poetics and the Rhetoric. On the age-old debate whether logic is an instrument of philosophy (Peripatetic view) or a part of philosophy (Stoic view), he argues that such a debate is futile and meaningless.

His views on logic represent a significant metaphysical approach, and it could be argued generally that metaphysical concerns lead Avicenna’s arguments in a range of philosophical and non-philosophical subjects. For example, he argues in The Cure that both logic and metaphysics share a concern with the study of secondary intelligibles (ma‘qulat thaniya), abstract concepts such as existence and time that are derived from primary concepts such as humanity and animality. Logic is the standard by which concepts—or the mental "existence" that corresponds to things that occur in extra-mental reality—can be judged and hence has both implications for what exists outside of the mind and how one may articulate those concepts through language. More importantly, logic is a key instrument and standard for judging the validity of arguments and hence acquiring knowledge. Salvation depends on the purity of the soul and in particular the intellect that is trained and perfected through knowledge. Of particular significance for later debates and refutations is his notion that knowledge depends on the inquiry of essential definitions (hadd) through syllogistic reasoning. The problem of course arises when one tries to make sense of an essential definition in a real, particular world, and when one’s attempts to complete the syllogism by striking on the middle term is foiled because one’s ‘intuition’ fails to grasp the middle term.

5. Ontology

From al-Farabi, Avicenna inherited the Neoplatonic emanationist scheme of existence. Contrary to the classical Muslim theologians, he rejected creation ex nihilo and argued that cosmos has no beginning but is a natural logical product of the divine One. The super-abundant, pure Good that is the One cannot fail to produce an ordered and good cosmos that does not succeed him in time. The cosmos succeeds God merely in logical order and in existence.

Consequently, Avicenna is well known as the author of one an important and influential proof for the existence of God. This proof is a good example of a philosopher’s intellect being deployed for a theological purpose, as was common in medieval philosophy. The argument runs as follows: There is existence, or rather our phenomenal experience of the world confirms that things exist, and that their existence is non-necessary because we notice that things come into existence and pass out of it. Contingent existence cannot arise unless it is made necessary by a cause. A causal chain in reality must culminate in one un-caused cause because one cannot posit an actual infinite regress of causes (a basic axiom of Aristotelian science). Therefore, the chain of contingent existents must culminate in and find its causal principle in a sole, self-subsistent existent that is Necessary. This, of course, is the same as the God of religion.

An important corollary of this argument is Avicenna’s famous distinction between existence and essence in contingents, between the fact that something exists and what it is. It is a distinction that is arguably latent in Aristotle although the roots of Avicenna’s doctrine are best understood in classical Islamic theology or kalam. Avicenna’s theory of essence posits three modalities: essences can exist in the external world associated with qualities and features particular to that reality; they can exist in the mind as concepts associated with qualities in mental existence; and they can exist in themselves devoid of any mode of existence. This final mode of essence is quite distinct from existence. Essences are thus existentially neutral in themselves. Existents in this world exist as something, whether human, animal or inanimate object; they are ‘dressed’ in the form of some essence that is a bundle of properties that describes them as composites. God on the other hand is absolutely simple, and cannot be divided into a bundle of distinct ontological properties that would violate his unity. Contingents, as a mark of their contingency, are conceptual and ontological composites both at the first level of existence and essence and at the second level of properties. Contingent things in this world come to be as mentally distinct composites of existence and essence bestowed by the Necessary.

This proof from contingency is also sometimes termed “radical contingency.” Later arguments raged concerning whether the distinction was mental or real, whether the proof is ontological or cosmological. The clearest problem with Avicenna’s proofs lies in the famous Kantian objection to ontological arguments: is existence meaningful in itself? Further, Cantor’s solution to the problem of infinity may also be seen as a setback to the argument from the impossibility of actual infinites.

Avicenna’s metaphysics is generally expressed in Aristotelian terms. The quest to understand being qua being subsumes the philosophical notion of God. Indeed, as we have seen divine existence is a cornerstone of his metaphysics. Divine existence bestows existence and hence meaning and value upon all that exists. Two questions that were current were resolved through his theory of existence. First, theologians such as al-Ash‘ari and his followers were adamant in denying the possibility of secondary causality; for them, God was the sole agent and actor in all that unfolded. Avicenna’s metaphysics, although being highly deterministic because of his view of radical contingency, still insists of the importance of human and other secondary causality. Second, the age-old problem was discussed: if God is good, how can evil exist? Divine providence ensures that the world is the best of all possible worlds, arranged in the rational order that one would expect of a creator akin to the demiurge of the Timaeus. But while this does not deny the existence of evil in this world of generation and corruption, some universal evil does not exist because of the famous Neoplatonic definition of evil as the absence of good. Particular evils in this world are accidental consequences of good. Although this deals with the problem of natural evils, the problem of moral evils and particularly ‘horrendous’ evils remains.

6. Epistemology

The second most influential idea of Avicenna is his theory of the knowledge. The human intellect at birth is rather like a tabula rasa, a pure potentiality that is actualized through education and comes to know. Knowledge is attained through empirical familiarity with objects in this world from which one abstracts universal concepts. It is developed through a syllogistic method of reasoning; observations lead to prepositional statements, which when compounded lead to further abstract concepts. The intellect itself possesses levels of development from the material intellect (al-‘aql al-hayulani), that potentiality that can acquire knowledge to the active intellect (al-‘aql al-fa‘il), the state of the human intellect at conjunction with the perfect source of knowledge.

But the question arises: how can we verify if a proposition is true? How do we know that an experience of ours is veridical? There are two methods to achieve this. First, there are the standards of formal inference of arguments —Is the argument logically sound? Second, and most importantly, there is a transcendent intellect in which all the essences of things and all knowledge resides. This intellect, known as the Active Intellect, illuminates the human intellect through conjunction and bestows upon the human intellect true knowledge of things. Conjunction, however, is episodic and only occurs to human intellects that have become adequately trained and thereby actualized. The active intellect also intervenes in the assessment of sound inferences through Avicenna’s theory of intuition. A syllogistic inference draws a conclusion from two prepositional premises through their connection or their middle term. It is sometimes rather difficult to see what the middle term is; thus when someone reflecting upon an inferential problem suddenly hits upon the middle term, and thus understands the correct result, she has been helped through intuition (hads) inspired by the active intellect. There are various objections that can be raised against this theory, especially because it is predicated upon a cosmology widely refuted in the post-Copernican world.

One of the most problematic implications of Avicennan epistemology relates to God’s knowledge. The divine is pure, simple and immaterial and hence cannot have a direct epistemic relation with the particular thing to be known. Thus Avicenna concluded while God knows what unfolds in this world, he knows things in a ‘universal manner’ through the universal qualities of things. God only knows kinds of existents and not individuals. This resulted in the famous condemnation by al-Ghazali who said that Avicenna’s theory amounts to a heretical denial of God’s knowledge of particulars. particulars.

7. Psychology

Avicenna’s epistemology is predicated upon a theory of soul that is independent of the body and capable of abstraction. This proof for the self in many ways prefigures by 600 years the Cartesian cogito and the modern philosophical notion of the self. It demonstrates the Aristotelian base and Neoplatonic structure of his psychology. This is the so-called ‘flying man’ argument or thought experiment found at the beginning of his Fi’-Nafs/De Anima (Treatise on the Soul). If a person were created in a perfect state, but blind and suspended in the air but unable to perceive anything through his senses, would he be able to affirm the existence of his self? Suspended in such a state, he cannot affirm the existence of his body because he is not empirically aware of it, thus the argument may be seen as affirming the independence of the soul from the body, a form of dualism. But in that state he cannot doubt that his self exists because there is a subject that is thinking, thus the argument can be seen as an affirmation of the self-awareness of the soul and its substantiality. This argument does raise an objection, which may also be levelled at Descartes: how do we know that the knowing subject is the self?

This rational self possesses faculties or senses in a theory that begins with Aristotle and develops through Neoplatonism. The first sense is common sense (al-hiss al-mushtarak) which fuses information from the physical senses into an epistemic object. The second sense is imagination (al-khayal) which processes the image of the perceived epistemic object. The third sense is the imaginative faculty (al-mutakhayyila) which combines images in memory, separates them and produces new images. The fourth sense is estimation or prehension (wahm) that translates the perceived image into its significance. The classic example for this innovative sense is that of the sheep perceiving the wolf and understanding the implicit danger. The final sense is where the ideas produced are stored and analyzed and ascribed meanings based upon the production of the imaginative faculty and estimation. Different faculties do not compromise the singular integrity of the rational soul. They merely provide an explanation for the process of intellection.

8. Mysticism and Oriental Philosophy

Was Avicenna a mystic? Some of his interpreters in Iran have answered in the positive, citing the lost work The Easterners that on the face of it has a superficial similarity to the notion of Ishraqi or Illuminationist, intuitive philosophy expounded by Suhrawardi (d. 1191) and the final section of Pointers that deal with the terminology of mysticism and Sufism. The question does not directly impinge on his philosophy so much since The Easterners is mostly non-extant. But it is an argument relating to ideology and the ways in which modern commentators and scholars wish to study Islamic philosophy as a purely rational form of inquiry or as a supra-rational method of understanding reality. Gutas has been most vehement in his denial of any mysticism in Avicenna. For him, Avicennism is rooted in the rationalism of the Aristotelian tradition. Intuition does not entail mystical disclosure but is a mental act of conjunction with the active intellect. The notion of intuition is located itself by Gutas in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics 89b10-11. While some of the mystical commentators of Avicenna have relied upon his pseudo-epigraphy (such as some sort of Persian Sufi treatises and the Mi‘rajnama), one ought not to throw the baby out with the bath water. The last sections of Pointers are significant evidence of Avicenna’s acceptance of some key epistemological possibilities that are present in mystical knowledge such as the possibility of non-discursive reason and simple knowledge. Although one can categorically deny that he was a Sufi (and indeed in his time the institutions of Sufism were not as established as they were a century later) and even raise questions about his adherence to some form of mysticism, it would be foolish to deny that he flirts with the possibilities of mystical knowledge in some of his later authentic works.

9. The Avicennan Tradition and His Legacy

Avicenna’s major achievement was to propound a philosophically defensive system rooted in the theological fact of Islam, and its success can be gauged by the recourse to Avicennan ideas found in the subsequent history of philosophical theology in Islam. In the Latin West, his metaphysics and theory of the soul had a profound influence on scholastic arguments, and as in the Islamic East, was the basis for considerable debate and argument. Just two generations after him, al-Ghazali (d. 1111) and al-Shahrastani (d. 1153) in their attacks testify to the fact that no serious Muslim thinker could ignore him. They regarded Avicenna as the principal representative of philosophy in Islam. In the later Iranian tradition, Avicenna’s thought was critically distilled with mystical insight, and he became known as a mystical thinker, a view much disputed in more recent scholarship. Nevertheless the major works of Avicenna, The Cure and Pointers, became the basis for the philosophical curriculum in the madrasa. Numerous commentaries, glosses and super-glosses were composed on them and continued to be produced into the 20th century. While our current views on cosmology, the nature of the self, and knowledge raise distinct problems for Avicennan ideas, they do not address the important issue of why his thought remained so influential for such a long period of time. In In recent times, Avicenna has been attacked by some contemporary Arab Muslim thinkers in search of a new rationalism within Arab culture, one that champions Averroes against Avicenna.