نشریه تاریخ فلسفه اسلامی
پیاپی 12 (زمستان 1403)

The study has focused on the views of Fārābī regarding the essence and foundations of the two concepts of "political philosophy" and "political jurisprudence". By elucidating and then analyzing the opinions of Fārābī, it has sought to answer the question of whether "political philosophy and political jurisprudence in Farabi's philosophy are the same". By examining what Fārābī has discussed in his works Kitāb al-Millah, Siāsat al-Madania, and Al-Madinah Fāzel'a regarding political philosophy and political jurisprudence, it can be understood that both concepts exist in Fārābī's civil philosophy, and even their theoretical foundation is present in his theoretical wisdom. However, it should be noted that it is not possible to consider the essence of these two to be the same, but in terms of the foundations that include the foundations and the purpose, these two concepts can be considered as two parts of a single whole. The foundation and purpose of Fārābī's political philosophy and political jurisprudence, since they are part of the civil philosophy of Fārābī, is the same as the foundations and purpose of civil wisdom. The distinguishing feature of Fārābī's philosophical school with other philosophical schools is his emphasis on happiness, and this key concept is the foundations and purpose of civil wisdom first and then political philosophy and political jurisprudence.

The Book of Salvation (al-Najāt) is one of Avicenna's most significant works, encompassing essays on logic, natural science, theology, and mathematics. The latter section was added by al-Jawjazānī, drawing from Avicenna's mathematical writings. The theology part presents Avicenna's metaphysical principles and his final views on metaphysics. The section on resurrection is a central topic within the theology part. Avicenna states in the introduction that one of his objectives in writing the Book of Salvation was to provide a philosophical explanation of resurrection. In this theology, Avicenna bases his account of resurrection on various principles from his theoretical and practical philosophy, making it, in fact, a culmination of both. Since all currently published versions of the theology section of the Book of Salvation fail to meet the standards of a critical edition and have overlooked the valuable early manuscript of Murad Molla 1410, they cannot be regarded as critically edited texts. This highlights the necessity of producing a proper critical edition. The Murad Molla 1410 manuscript was transcribed by Riḍwān b. al-Sāʿātī, a sixth-century AH scholar, and underwent a thorough comparison with other manuscripts and works by Avicenna for fifteen years after its transcription. At the end of this manuscript, there are five "balāgh" notes (collation statements certifying that the manuscript was collated with a more original copy held by the teacher and confirmed to match it). Additionally, numerous other collation statements appear throughout the manuscript. The scribe also inserted valuable marginal notes, comparing the Book of Salvation with Avicenna's other works, including the Book of Healing (al-Shifāʾ) and Origin and Destination (al-Mabdaʾ wa-l-Maʿād). Given the importance of resurrection in Avicenna's intellectual system and the theology of the Book of Salvation, this article prioritizes and presents a critical edition of the resurrection section of the book. The edition is based on three early and valuable manuscripts from the sixth century AH, housed in the following libraries: Āstān-i Quds Razavi, Haraççi Oġlu, and Murad Molla. These manuscripts surpass all other extant copies in terms of both temporal precedence and accuracy. The article offers an analysis of the resurrection section in the theology of the Book of Salvation and provides a detailed codicology of these three manuscripts.

For the purpose of criticizing the method chosen by the "mystics" in their theological inferences, Ibn Rushd attributes two claims to them: one- the mystics do not believe in theoretical methods and, two- the mystics believe in knowledge only by adorning the soul with lust, and induction from God. is formed He believes that the only proof of the Sufis for these claims is the appearance of verses from the Qur'an; But the appearances of the mentioned verses are not enough to prove their meaning. In order for a method to be justified and acceptable, it must simultaneously estimate the three components of "generality", "compatibility with the appearances of the Qur'an", and "compatibility with the framework of Aristotelian logic". According to him, the "mystic" method does not have any of the three mentioned components. We assume Ibn Rushd's understanding of mysticism and do not question its correctness. Then we argue that: (1) it is possible to provide a logical formulation of the claims attributed to the Sufis; A formulation that is compatible even with Ibn Rushd's methodological assumptions. (2) The appearance of disputed verses can equally prove both Sufis' claim and Ibn Rushd's claim. (3) Ibn Rushd is faced with semantic skepticism in his search for the Qur'an's verses, (4) In his semantics, Ibn Rushd chose interpretation based on the foundations of Aristotelian philosophy; This way of interpreting is neither general nor compatible with the appearances of the Qur'an; Therefore, the objection that Ibn Rushd makes to Sufis is self-defeating.

Intellect is one of the important topics in the history of philosophy since Aristotle and his commentators, some of Aristotle's commentators whom have written a treatise on Intellect. What made the issue of Intellect a challenging issue for Aristotle's commentators is the view of what First Intellect is as a part of the human soul or is level in the hierarchy of beings. Examining it can also explain the ontological position Intellect and its duties. The question is, what is the truth of First Intellect according to Kindy and what is its ontological and epistemological position in his philosophical thought? On this basis,In this article, with the analytical descriptive method, we found that tThe first intellect is always Actual and the cause for the Intelligible and the cause for the second intellects and precedes all of them, and the second intellects are the other three levels of intellect And these three levels of intellect, are a part of the Thinking soul and there is no clarity in expressing Al-Kindi to separate the first intellect from the Soul. Eepistemologically, it actualizes the soul that is potentially intellect. We have reached this conclusion through Kindy's theory of first intellect. And we have reached this conclusion Al-Kindi's theory of the first intellect is a combination of the Aristotelian, Platonic, and Book of Causes perspectives.

Dằqữgḣἳ’s Story is an allegorical explanation of the "whole thing" rule, and rather a mention of the unity of existence in the specific tone and context of Rumi's mysticism; Without it being necessary to consider him as the existential unity of theoretical mysticism. The relation of Daqoqi's story to the Rumi is the relation of the rule of "the whole thing" to the mysticism of Ibn Arabi, that anyone who does not pay attention to their meaning and meanings has not been able to understand the essence of theoretical mysticism as well as the spiritual Masnavi. The present article believes that despite the many differences between Ibn Arabi's mysticism and Rumi's mysticism, monotheism of the Almighty is the most basic concept around which both schools have been formed. The most important similes used in Dằqữgḣἳ’s Story are candle = light, tree and human. The important thing in common with the mentioned parables is that: all three are upright and upright: and this is proportional to the length and depth of existence. All three are related to burning; And at the same time, all three are related to cultivation. Existence is one with light, and light is one of the divine names. Light and existence are pure unity and all multitudes are the emergence of this unity; The truth of man is the truth of light.

Analytical study of philosophical rules along with their historical study provides the basis for a better understanding of them and also clarifies the effectiveness of philosophical opinions. One of the most important and useful rules in Islamic philosophy is the rule " knowing the cause require knowing the effect ". The connection of this rule with the two issues of the fundamentality of existence and the truth of science and the evolution of these two in Islamic Philosophy reveals the necessity of re-reading this rule. we first review the background of this rule and explain an important point; In what condition the knowledge of the cause leads to the knowledge of the effect. Then, according to its historical course, we will explain the arguments presented on it, and in the end, we will discuss the most important functions of this rule and some of its branches. The direct knowledge of the effect through the direct knowledge of the cause, establishing a new proof based on this rule based on the principles of transcendental wisdom and stating its difference with the rule of "Things that have a cause are not known except through the cause" are among the most important achievements of this article.