In this paper, the writers have compared Mulla Sadra's philosophical ideas concerning the INTELLECTS and the angelology of Nahjulbalaghah. In doing so, they have studied all of Mulla Sadra's philosophical and interpretive books and collected his ideas on the INTELLECTS. Moreover, they have also had a thorough study of the content of Nahjulbalaghah in relation to angels. Then, only by the study of the two attributes of the "abstraction" and "plurality" of angels (in Nahjulbalaghah) and the INTELLECTS (in Mulla Sadra's philosophy), they have concluded that favorite angels correspond to the INTELLECTS only if they are at the level of perfect abstraction. However, in the case of ontological decline and assimilation of those angels in form and configuration to their lower world, they will not correspond to the INTELLECTS. In terms of plurality, angels are also as numerous as the INTELLECTS and enjoy specific and gradational multiplicity. Nevertheless, nothing has been mentioned concerning the origin of angel's plurality in Nahjulbalaghah.

Development of intellect has been the mission of all prophets and saints. People will have the necessary preparation for evolution of INTELLECTS based on experience and historical maturity in the era of reappearance and Imam will begin his universal mission by evolution of humans’ INTELLECTS. Based on some narrations, INTELLECTS will be evolved by the era of reappearance and the means of this collection and perfection of INTELLECTS is the powerful hands of Vilayat. Accumulation of INTELLECTS means gathering of each individual’s intellect and its result is reaching to unity and consensus. Accumulation of INTELLECTS is carried out by gradual propaganda and education of Imam and the effect of Imam’s favor is normal and natural but not miracle. The contemporary knowledge has also figured out that human possesses significant skills and capacities who is able to enjoy them in future. At the end of this study, it is pointed out to the mutual relation between intellect and science; science causes growth of intellect and intellect provides the ground to achieve science.

Some people think that Surhavardi has done nothing in philosophy but changing technical terms; otherwise, his philosophy is not different from that of peripatetic. The authors in this article go through Shaykh Ishraq’s ideas about the world of INTELLECTS and compare them with those of Ibn Sina in order to establish the claim that Suhravardi, despite the fact that he benefits from a peripatetic context, and was one of its adherents at the outset, takes a distance from them in the process of his philosophical development.On the basis of his philosophical principles, Shaykh Ishraq establishes some levels of being such as the world of horizontal INTELLECTS. Moreover, those elements common to his philosophy and that of peripatetics find new interpretation in his homogeneous ontological system. According to the authors, although Suhravardi’s theory suffers from some shortcomings, his analysis seems more accurate in general.

The existence of single beings in the name of INTELLECTS is one of the important issues of Islamic philosophy which is favorable and opposed. This article examines the rationale of Fayyad Lahiji on the existence of intellect. He cited three major rational reasons for this issue. His first reason is the rule of Al_ Wahid that he regards it with problems as Khaje Tusi and passes through it. But his two other reasons are based on the permanent motion of the sky and not cause being of the object. Khaje also considers these two reasons unfinished, but Lahiji does not accept the critiques of Khaje on these two reasons and considers these two reasons enough to prove the INTELLECTS. This article reinforces Khaje's view and challenges Fayyad's view and also does not consider these two reasons enough to prove the claim.

Banu Amin, who is a follower of MullaSadra's School of philosophy, has differences with her predecessors in some positions, such as the forces of the human Self, “INTELLECTS Theory”, etc. Regarding the INTELLECTS Theory, while criticizing the previous theories, she proposes the Theory of the Muhammadiyah's Spirit. The main question of the present research is the critical review of his encounter with the INTELLECTS Theory and the evaluation of the Muhammadiyah's Spirit Theory. In his opinions, the Incorporeal of the First Intellect emphasized and she considers the First Intellect to have a delicate substance. Banu Amin answers the eight problems surrounding the INTELLECTS Theory. Two problems are about the Incorporeal and Being of the intellect, five problems are about the corporeality of the intellect, and one problem is about the longitudinal order and the number of the INTELLECTS. On the one hand, she considers rational reasons for Incorporeal of INTELLECTS to be acceptable. On the other hand, she believes that considering the narrative evidences and the flaws of the rule of “Alvahed”, the corporeality of INTELLECTS not rejected in general. Therefore, in the end, she considers the corporeality of INTELLECTS to be permissible and as the alternative Theory uses the Theory of Muhammadiyah's Spirit to explain the relationship between one and many. Sometimes she considers the Muhammadiyah's Spirit to be equivalent to the First Intellect, and sometimes considering the First Intellect to be corporeal and the Muhammadiyah's Spirit to be Incorporeal, she considers them to be differencing from each other. Therefore, Banu Amin criticizes the Theories that existed about INTELLECTS until her time, and accepts and proves some parts of both Theories of Corporeal and Incorporeal of INTELLECTS, and rejects some parts, and finally, expresses a new Theory about INTELLECTS. In addition, in this regard even provides a new definition for the substance. Banu Amin is close to the mystics in the Muhammadiyah's Spirit Theory. Muhammadiyah's Spirit is the first issued from whom the First Intellect is issue, and the same characteristics that the philosophers have listed for the First Intellect; she counts for the Muhammadiyah's Spirit. Relying on narrative reasons and their preference and discussion from different points of view has created this new Theory in the opinions of Banu Amin. The present research method is analytical-critical.

In this article the thesis of "INTELLECTS" and its influence on Sadra's understanding of Quranic verses are investigated and criticized. For this purpose, all Sadra's philosophical and interpretative works are studied and his Quranic interpretations based on this thesis are gathered. Then, in the light of other verses, traditions, rational and verbal circumstantial evidences, as well as features of the INTELLECTS, quoted in philosophy, these interpretations are verified. In this research, it is proved that all Sadra's interpretations based on this thesis, but 3 cases are not valid.

Analysis and study of philosophical concepts has long been discussed among philosophers. The main question of this research is whether Sheikh Ishraq’ s interpretation of philosophical concepts is correct? Through this research, it becomes clear through descriptive analytical method. And he has considered them as mere mental matters and in the shadow of it, he has proposed the theory of the originality of the nature and validity of existence. The source of Sheikh Ishraq’ s mistake lies in the fact that external realization equates concepts with concrete realization and neglects the realization of integration. Is. While this argument is based on the said egalitarianism, and by denying this egalitarianism, the above rule has not been current in philosophical concepts, and at the same time the philosophical concepts will have external realization, whether abstract external realization according to the famous view of philosophers or Realization of the image that is accepted by Sadr al-Mutachr('39')allehin.

The basis of the originality of existence created fundamental changes in philosophy that the essentials of such a theory were not followed even by Mulla Sadra. One of the essentials of authenticity of existence is the changes that take place in the principle of division of rationalities into primary and secondary rationalities. The division of rationalities into the first rationality is derived from the basis of originality and sensibility, which by proposing the theory of originality of existence and adherence to its accessories, all sensory, imaginary and intellectual perceptions have truth to the extent of benefiting from existence, and based on the theory of abstraction of general concepts from the external facts general concepts have a counterpart in the world of wisdom, and none of the rationalities can be considered to have only an abstract origin without having a counterpart. The division of INTELLECTS into the first and the second rational is one of the famous philosophical divisions that has been accepted in The philosophy of masha and sadra with different interpretations. This research, with the method of library, collection and analysis of information and comparison of opinions, seeks to prove the incorrect division of rationalities and enumerates the ontological results of such forms. On this basis, first the division of INTELLECTS on the basis of the principle of essence and the principle of existence is examined, then the incorrect causes of the division of INTELLECTS are explained, and finally the ontological results of the forms are divided into the division of the first and second INTELLECTS. Among the results of this research is that in the light of existence of having general concepts in the world and abstractions and the basis of the principle of existence, it is not possible to divide the rationals into the first and second rationals, Essential unity has a weak place in carrying, and existential concepts are carried over each other based on the connection that is established between them, The division of affairs into reality and credit is incorrect, and all things are real to the extent that they benefit from existence, The division of affairs into intrinsic and transverse is incorrect because it is based on the originality of nature, while on the basis of the originality of existence and the validity of nature, there is no place for it.

Plotinus considers Demiurge as intellect and the Platonic ideas as its thoughts. At the same time, he does not regard the existence of these thoughts as dependent on the intellect's reflection, but each of them as an independent particular intellect, whose self-thinking requires all ideas to be thought, as if it is identical with the whole hypostasis of intellect. This theory, which is called "Internality Thesis", is one of the outstanding features of Plotinus' philosophy and one of the most problematic issues in Neo-platonic philosophies. This theory has been reflected in Theologia to some extent and is one of Mulla-Sadra's resources to believe in the unity and multiplicity of intellect as the first emanated being. This paper, after discussing the Plotinus theory and its context, is going to study Mulla-Sadra's view on the unity and multiplicity of intellect, and his being affected by Theologia as well as by the verses and traditions.

Intelligence has a wide range. Degrees of intelligence can be divided into primary and secondary intelligences..Examining the word intelligence with various words almost synonymous in transcendent wisdom such as intellect, science, wisdom, etc. shows that human intelligence is dependent on higher intelligence.Artificial intelligence, which is the achievement of human intelligence, has very precise functions such as learning, optimization, generalizability.By describing, analyzing and comparing the intelligent machine with man, we can better understand the distance between human consciousness and the knowledge of the first causes and the entry of multiplicity and contradiction in the material world with the higher worlds.Traces of morality and will can be seen in different levels of reason, as well as in the types and varieties of intelligence in psychological issues...Although it seems that some of the human intelligence goes back to the way of performance in the field of ethics and voluntary actions, but due to the effects of external or previous conditions on human voluntary actions, the differences between these two types of secondary intelligence (human intelligence and artificial intelligence) It descends to a lower limit.Paying attention to the truth of the will and its effect on morality cannot explain the difference between human intelligence and the systemic functions of intelligent machines.Regardless of emotions, inner states or presence sciences, even the will cannot be the original distinction between human intelligence and artificial intelligence