The distinction between philosophy of Avicenna and Aristotle one, on Reading of Averroes

It has been seen, in the writings of western scholars in history of philosophy, that Avicenna was considered as a commentator of Aristotle, and many of Muslim and Arab authors have accepted this view, more or less. But as we Know he denied it in the several positions of his works: (Introduction of Hekmat-olmashreqien,outobiography and Almobahe ssat,).
The questions about of Avicenna’s philosophy: Is the philosophy of Avicenna continuation of Aristotle one? If not, what are the differences between tow philosophy (philosophy of Avicenna and Aristotle one)? And what criteria for recognition of these differences is reasonable? The article with using the Averroes reading of Aristotle, answers these three questions, and tally the differences on narration of Averroes, who is the credible and important commentator of Aristotle- regardless of Averroes’s critic of Avicenna and the answers to him.
Thus, as shown in the article, Averroes believed the philosophy of Avicenna is different from Aristotle one in more than fifty stands and isn’t the continuation of it. The Averroes’s point of view can be considered from three aspects: the phrases that show the differents, the Fundamental principles, and the philosophical details (more than the fifty stands). The criterion is the same comparison Averroes has done, as listed.