Can the argument that the book "Al-Imama wa Al-Siyasa" is not authentically attributed to Ibn Qutaybah be refuted, based on the absence of prior doubt regarding its attribution before the Spanish Orientalist, and Ibn Al-Arabi Al-Maliki's affirmation of its attribution to him despite his denunciation of it, in addition to the fact that the translators' omission of mentioning the book does not imply its non-attribution to him, coupled with the existence of those who denounced him because of it, and the consistency of its style with Ibn Qutaybah's style in other works?

The attribution of the book "Al-Imamah wa Al-Siyasah" to Ibn Qutaybah is not valid due to the absence of conclusive evidence; the mere existence of a copy bearing his name is insufficient to prove the attribution. The circumstantial evidence raises doubts: Ibn Qutaybah did not refer to it in his own books, none of his contemporaries attributed it to him, and it has not been transmitted with a sound chain of narration (isnad). The strongest point of attribution is Ibn al-Arabi's quotation from it, but he expressed doubts about its content, which indicates that it did not reach him via a sound isnad. The mention of the book by later Maghrebi scholars further increases these doubts. The skepticism of Orientalists is not surprising, and Muslim researchers have followed suit after the emergence of these pieces of evidence. There is no similarity between it and Ibn Qutaybah's book "Al-Ma'arif," neither in the method of classification nor in the mention of chains of narration.