The Relationship between Reason and Sharia in the Philosophy of Avicenna and Its Consequences for the Relationship between Religion and Politics

One of the most important periods in the history of thought is the first centuries of Islamic civilization. With the arrival of Greek philosophy in Islamic lands, we are faced with the formation of "Islamic philosophy", which attempts to establish a relationship between rea- son and Sharia. Various theorists in the history of thought have explained the subject of rea- son and Sharia in this period, such as Erwin Rosenthal and Leo Strauss. This study, based on Quentin Skinner's "context-text-based" interpretive approach, assuming what Strauss called the "absence of Aristotle's politics in Islamic philosophy" and what Rosenthal called the "attempt of Islamic philosophers to reconcile reason and revelation." He states that we will examine Avicenna's encounter with the issue of the wisdom and revelation in his "con- text and discourse ruling in his time". Our question is that what is the relationship between reason and Sharia in Avicenna's thought; in what context was it formed and what were the consequences for the relationship between religion and politics? The hypothesis of this study states that considering the lack of Aristotelian politics in Islamic philosophy, in the time of Avicenna, with the prevailing Platonic reading in practical wisdom, Avicenna re- lated politics to the discussion of prophecy, which is possible except for legislating to estab- lish a city, Medina (utopia Polis) It is not acceptable, and the most obvious and supreme example of these laws is the law of Sharia, and its author is the Prophet. Accordingly, he presented a Platonic reading. The consequences of this theological reading of politics were the confinement of reason in the field of theoretical wisdom and the rule of religion over politics in practical wisdom.