نشریه حکمت سینوی
پیاپی 38 (پاییز 1386)

All people in order to attain happiness have to understand intelligible truths. But on the basis of nature, habit or the kind of certain intelligibles the concept and assent of intelligible is not possible for all. The faculty of imagination by the imitation of intelligibles in the garment of sensible objects can provide us with degrees of understanding intelligibles.
Prophets through revelation and by way of different traditions have the power to imitate the happiness and intelligible truth for different peoples and human communities and following prophets and their successors, orators and artists in the ideal city-state in convincing and imaginative ways convey the content of revelation among all the ranks of the ideal city-state and in this way propagate the concept and assent of intilligibles.

Artists

One of the views which Ibn Sina has seriously challenged is Plato's theory of ideas. No doubt, when plato propounded such a theory he was firmly convinced that thereby he can explain the genesis of the world of sensilbe objects.Ibn Sina, is one of the philosophers who has had a negative assessment of Platonic theory of ideas and explicity has attributed it to the immature period of Greek thought while at the same time he does not conceal his praising for the other contemporary and great disciple of Plato that is Aristotle. He explicitly regards belief in ideas due to ignorance. In his view such a theory is not based on strong demonstrative logic.Some parts of Ibn Sina's important works have been devoted to the review and criticisme of this theory, among them we can point to the seventh article in the theology of Shifa.In this article the writer intends that with a view to the general structure of that theory in Plato's thought and reformuted form in Ibn Sina's philosophy to show that why unlike other Muslim philosophers such as Sheiykh Ishraq and Mulla Sadra who have embraced that theory, Ibn Sina has maintained that this theory is inadequate in explaining the order of word's creation.For this reason by a review of written ideas of  Plato and Ibn Sina's pereception of that theory it has been tried to show that Ibn Sina's philosophical critique bas been so much justified .

According to Islamic philosophy the debates in natural philosophy (physics) can be used as axioms in divine science. Some of the debates in metaphysics is under the influence of empirical science or physics from the time of those philosophers who have put forward metaphysical theories. Today it is incumbent upon muslim thinkers to build on a new presentation of philosophical theology on the basis of new scientific data and to construct a metaphysics well – proportioned with modern scientific data, with contemporary explanation of old ideas. In this article, after examination the theory of heaven, which forms a part of old physics, the degree of the influence of this discussion on metaphysical debates will be studied and it will be shown that which debates needs revision and a different explanation.

The critics of Islamic Philosophy have always denied its independent philosophical identity. In this direction Islamic Philosophy is either considered an Arabic interpretation of Greek Philosophy by Muslims or by adding Islamic tag to it presented it as equivatent to Islamic science of Kalam. It is worth noting that although Islamic Philosophy has received its subject, method and early framework from Greek Philosophy, but in view of its benefiting from religious Islamic texts has its innovations that makes this philosophy distinguishable from Western Philosophy. Of course, this benefiting from religious texts, has not deprived it of its philosophical identity and has not changed it into science of Kalam, for this science by its subject, method and goal is different from science of Kalam.
Finally, Islamic philosophy is a science that by preserving its early and fundamental philosophical framework has utilized from religious texts in outlining its problems, raising arguments, removing doubts and confirmation and judgement.

Philosophers before Sadra by a definition of man as rational animal regard reason as true differentia and first perfection and perceptions and actual volitional activities as second perfection which occurs to his specific quiddity; therefore, the plurality and difference of human beings is from the second perfections that human souls in the course of their spiritual perfection get access to them.
Mulla Sadra by discussing the problem of matter and form for a definition of man, unlike previous philosophers regards human form as a purgatory between two worlds of corporeality and spirituality and by basing gradual perfection on substantial motion, regards human being as having different degrees that along with his existential perfection finds different quaddities. By appealing to divine verses and reports, he regards the essential difference of human soul as definitive and emphasizes that the best and most distinguished people can never be at the same plane with the worst and most degraded ones; these two, not only in essential unity but also in specific unity, are different with each other. In this article, after a review of these two completely different views that are deriving from a difference based on principles and foundations, the reason for diversity and essential difference between individual persons as well as the mystery of stations resulting from this diversity will be explained.

The historical situation and origin of illuminationist philosophy in view of the most striking feature of the seventh century ie. Ghazzali's attacks on philosophy and the critique of philosophy's populairty in the Islamic world is well explained.
The attitude and perception of Suhrawardi to ward Ghazzali's criticisms against philosophy has a fundamental difference with the kind of Ibn Rushd's encounter and opposition toward Ghazzali. According to Suhrawardi, Ghazzali is not an thinker who is against intellect, but is a thinker who points out gulf between reason and Philosophy. However, Suhrawardi unlike Ghazzlai with a reformist approach and by designing an illuminative philosophy alongside argumentation and discursive wisdom and through revival of wisdom has attempted to reconstruct the foundation of Islamic Philosophy and its continuation.

Among those people who regard the existence of whole world as deriving from accident and disregard the law of causality, some only attribute the emergence of individual beings to accident and maintain that in the genesis of material individual entities we can not disregard accident and defend the concept of causal necessity.
Aristotle besides believing in the law of causality throughout the universe, understands chance ad accident among causes.
But he does not believe in the conformity and affinity of chance and accident with necessity and considers accident and necessity as two opposite poles. Also Ibn Sina following the head of Peripatetics deals with the problem of chance and accident and thinks it does not contradict the law of causality. But in the framework of his specific cosmology and a different perception of existential causality explains them and does not consider them the real and positive causes of things and somewhat proceeds the discussion more successfully than Aristotle. But finally it is worth discussing which philosophical problem makes Aristotle and Ibn Sina to adopt such a position as regards chance and accident. This subject needs more investigation in the case of Ibn Sina. Because by accepting the best possible world, existence and sovereignty of causal necessity in the world and fore knowledge of Most High to creatures, there remains no place for such theories as chance and accident which has a more vulgar rather than a philosophical aspect and is deriving from man's ignorance with true causes.