Assistant professor of Islamic science and culture academy
Abstract
The relation of Prophet and philosopher in the Islamic political philosophy has been constantly the matter of discussion. This issue has been controversially understood in some of the works by Muslim philosophers. For instance, some individuals believed in the priority of philosopher over Prophet in Farabi’s political philosophy. Nevertheless, this issue is in need of discussing in the philosophy of other Muslim scholars such as Falsafe Motealiyah by Sadr al-Moteallehin e- Shirazi. The main problem of the present article is related to the way of stating the position of Prophet compared with philosopher in the philosophy of Molla Sadra.
It is claimed that considering the works of Molla Sadra, the position of Prophet in this philosophy, has been stated free of any vagueness against the works of other Muslim philosophers and in addition to stating the philosopher’s position, it has been deemed on the priority of Prophet over philosopher. The research method has been founded on the internal logic, the description as well as the analysis of the text. The focus of the article is on the basis of differentiating Prophet and philosopher and the position of each of them in the political thought of Sadr al- Moteallehin. One of the results of this discussion is that it is ended by disagreement and challenge concerning the priority of philosopher over Prophet in the Islamic political philosophy.
Lakzaee, S. (2016). The Status of Prophet and Philosopher in the Political Thought of Sadr al-Moteallehin. Political Science, 18(Issue 69), 119-140.
MLA
Sharif Lakzaee. "The Status of Prophet and Philosopher in the Political Thought of Sadr al-Moteallehin", Political Science, 18, Issue 69, 2016, 119-140.
HARVARD
Lakzaee, S. (2016). 'The Status of Prophet and Philosopher in the Political Thought of Sadr al-Moteallehin', Political Science, 18(Issue 69), pp. 119-140.
VANCOUVER
Lakzaee, S. The Status of Prophet and Philosopher in the Political Thought of Sadr al-Moteallehin. Political Science, 2016; 18(Issue 69): 119-140.
)