In some point of view, neither Michel Foucault nor Ibn Khaldun are considered philosophers in the conventional classifications, but both are very  important in intellectual and, of course, in philosophical contexts, especially for those who are interested in the deep study of human life from the perspective of political thought.The main concern of two thinkers, one in the 14th century, the other in the 20th century, is the issue  of power, although neither of them provided a precise definition of it. In this article, an attempt has been made to show the place of power and domination in the political thought of both thinkers by examining the thoughts of two thinkers. And in search of an answer to this question, how did Asabiyyah and industry of religion in Ibn Khaldun's thought and social control through self-technology and discipline in Foucault's thought lead to the expansion of the domination of power? This article is written by analytically comparing the opinions of two thinkers based on Ibn Khaldun's most important book called Muqaddimah and Foucault's late works

Though thoughts and ideas of Ibn Khaldun had special originality and innovation with numerous creative subjects, there is no doubt that some of these issues are under the influence of preceding thoughts and there are some commonalities between his thoughts and those of preceding Muslim scholars. One of the predecessors who influenced Ibn Khaldun was Ibn Athir, the writer of al-Kamil, who had a spark of historical thoughts in his work. Ibn Khaldun had been impressed by Ibn Athir in al-Kitabu l-ibar, but he did not mention him in the introduction (Muqaddimah known as Prolegomena) of his book. The aim of this article is to signify the influence of Ibn-Athir on Ibn Khaldun and discuss the issue of Ibn Khaldun’s silence on Ibn Athir’s influence in his works.

One of the important features of many of Ibn Taymiyyah’s works is their polemical nature, that is, he composed these works in the form of intense theological or jurisprudential polemics against his opponents. In these disputes, Ibn Taymiyyah has used arguments to defeat his opponents. This research aims to show that these arguments of Ibn Taymiyyah can sometimes turn into measures against himself and challenge some of his own most basic intellectual foundations. Our research method in this article is such that we follow a pattern of comparative study in Ibn Taymiyyah’s works and examine four examples of his polemical arguments against his opponents: arguing with Christians over their oral tradition arguing with Sunni jurists on the subject and instances of consensus, the issue of criticism and praise (jarḥ wa taʿdīl) of Abū Ḥanīfah, and finally the punishment of heretics. In the end, as research findings, we will show the contradictions in some of the issues Ibn Taymiyyah has argued over.

Ibn Ataefi Helli (death 786 A.H.) - 8th century scholar from Helle - Wrote quite a few number of books, most of them unpublished. one of his unpublished works is a summary of commentaries of Ali Ibn Ibrahim Qumi (shia scholar of 4th century A.H.); He added about 150 explanatory remarks to this summary.In this essay, 56 explanatory remarks of Ibn Ataeghi on the subject of conmentary-bound arguments and 17 explanatory remarks of him on fighhi-bound arguments of Qumi's commentary (based on 2 scribed versions of Ibn Ataeghi's book) has been included.

Examining the principles and rules of interpretation and the methodology of interpreters' interpretations is one of the approaches that has attracted the attention of Qur’an scholars. However, the methodology of the first interpreters of the Holy Qur’an has been less considered by Qur’an scholars. Since the narratives of the first interpreters of the Holy Qur’an are the foundation of the narrative interpretations of the Holy Qur’an, accuracy in the methodology of their narratives is a necessary. Tafsir Ibn Kathir Dameshghi is one of the great interpretations of the Sunnis which contains many narratives of the companions of the Holy Prophet. According to a rough study on Ibn Mas'ud's name in this interpretation, his name is repeated nearly 1600 times, and almost half of this repetition is dedicated to his interpretation narratives. Analyzing the interpretation narratives of this great companion of the Holy Prophet, as the founder of the Kufa school of interpretation, in the interpretation of Ibn Kathir, can show method and approach of Ibn Mas'ud in interpretation. Considering and analyzing Ibn Mas'ud's narratives in a descriptive-analytical method shows that the method of this interpreter is a comprehensive interpretation method that includes many aspects of the methods. He is like a lexical interpreter with a literary approach, a famous jurist with a jurisprudential approach, a historian familiar with history and its events, a scholar familiar with Quranic sciences as the later type of scientific method of interpreting the Holy Qur’an, a rationalist interpreter with a rational approach, and finally as an interpreter from the Ahl al-Bayt school, familiar with the general spirit of the verses of the Holy Qur'an, deals with the interpretation of the verses of the Qur'an in the shadow of other verses and interpretation narratives received from the Holy Prophet

The comparison between the views of Ibn Malik, in Alfiya, and his son, Ibn al-Nazim, in Sharh Ibn al-Nazim ‘ala alfiyat Ibn Malik, is one of the most important morphological and grammatical issues in the Arabic grammer. Alfiya (ألفیة ابن مالک) is a rhymed book of Arabic grammar written by Ibn Malik in the 13th century. Sharh Ibn al-Nazim ‘ala alfiyat Ibn Malik is considered one of the best commentaries which has been written on Alfiya, because the author of this commentary was the son of the Ibn Malik. Ibn al-Nazim, the son of Ibn Malik, was one of the most Arab prominent grammarians who have learned Arabic grammar straightly from his father. The alfiyat Ibn Malik and its explanation also help students and investigators in their morphological and grammatical studies. So this thesis seeks to compare the views of Ibn Malik, in Alfiya, and his son, Ibn al-Nazim, in Sharh Ibn al-Nazim ‘ala Alfiyat Ibn Malik. From this point of view, the study aims at comparing their opinions and the differences between their opinions on the morphological and grammatical issues. It should be also noted that the approach taken in this article is the analytical approach. The most important finding of the research is that the differences of opinion between them are less than ten, and the most important of these views are as follows: the communication of pronouns of Nasikheh verbs, the connection of “lyta”, “La‘alla”, “Qad” and “Qat” with “Noon al-viqayah” and issue of Title and Nickname….

The present article consists of two main sections. In the first section the writer tries to deal with. the topics which in contemporary epistemology has been advanced about tradional foundationalism, anq in the meantime to show both the weaknesses and strengths of these theories briefly. Following this preliminary discussion, in the second section besides the review of Ibn Sina's point of view about the problem of foundation and principles of knowledge, it has been shown that this theory can be included in the foundationalist theories but with a special reading. This theory, with its characteristic features (including, its being foundation of higher beings in relation to lower beings in all kinds of knowledge from observation to certainty, foundational mode of concept for assertion, foundational mode of axioms of every science for the problems of that science, foundational mode of higher sciences in relation to lower sciences and also foundational mode of immediate perceptions for other kinds of knowledge and at the top of immediate perceptions foundational mode of basic self - evident propositions both potentially and, complementary for all kinds of indirect knowledge) neither follows the present-day traditional foundationalism that we deal with in the first section nor is susceptible to the many difficullies of traditional foundationalism of today.

This article is a translation of the entry “Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ” from the second edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam. It provides an overview of his major extant works and his influence on Arabic literature. The focus is primarily on Kalīla wa Dimna, Adab al-Kabīr, and Risāla fī al-Ṣaḥāba. The sources section references some of the most important scholarly works on Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ and his writings.

lbn-e Farez is the greatest sufist poet in Arabic. His poems have been welcomed by many writers and researchers. Although he has had some prose, totally he is considered as one of the most well-known in the culture of Islam and Gnosticism. This paper attempts to provide readers with an introduction to Ibn-e Farez.

In the present study, we focus on Ibn Sina's thoughts (359-416 AH) on the what, why, principles, realm and how of interpretation and its explanation based on Islamic mysticism. According to Ibn Sina, interpretation refers to the act of revealing truth in its true sense. In this regard, there is no difference between Ibn Sina and Ibn Arabi. Although they have their own language and terminology, they are similar in definition, principles and the why of interpretation. There are, of course, differences between the two in the realm of interpretation and how to interpret a proposition. To deal with the differences, we first draw on the works of Ibn Sina and then explain our findings based on the sources of Islamic mysticism. The most important finding of the present study is the new explanation of Ibn Sina's thought based on the teachings of Islamic mysticism. Our goal is a deeper understanding of Ibn Sina's terms and their mystical explanation. To this end, we have adopted the method of philosophical-intellectual analysis of words and propositions.