The same explanation of reason and law from Ibn Rushd's point of view by referring to the fasl almaqal

In the Islamic tradition, since it is impossible to promise the absolute superiority of reason over revelation, some considered reason to be merely a servant of religion, and some believed in the harmony of reason and revelation and non-conflict. Ibn Rushd's explanation in the treatise "Fima al-Maqal Fima bin al-Hikma wa Shari'ah min al-Utsal" is based on the premise that Shari'a is right and that which leads to better knowledge is obligatory, and while rational reflection is obligatory Shari'ah, then its product (philosophy) It is also right, and since right does not contradict right, then there is harmony between sharia and reason. In order to resolve possible conflicts, he also raises the issue of "interpretation" and suggests that we should allow religious propositions that are in apparent conflict with reason. In his view, the Shari'a, due to the differences in the talents of the people, has an appearance and an interior, and the inner understanding of the Qur'an owes to the rules that only a philosopher can use to interpret the Sharia. In this article, with reference to the above-mentioned treatise, first the evolution of the concept of intellect and its divisions is stated in order to reveal the meaning of philosophical intellect which Ibn Rushd seeks to prove its similarity with Sharia. Then, by stating the types of possible conflicts between reason and sharia and mentioning Ibn Rushd's answers, we come to the conclusion that while explaining the non-conflict between reason and revelation, he has also defended philosophy.