عنوان مقاله [English]
Unity of the intellect and the object of intellection (intelligible), where the intellect thinks something other than itself, is one of the most important innovations of the Sadraean philosophy. But there are two main approaches in its interpretation. According to the first, this unity means that the intellect and the intelligible are realized by one and the same existence, whereas according to the second, this unity implies that the intelligible is a description of intellect, so that the ineligible is not external to the intellect. Furthermore, one argument for this unity, known as matter and form argument, proves this unity by supposing a) the congruency between receiving form by matter and receiving the intelligible by intellect and b) the unified composition of form and matter. But some, rejecting the first premise, objected to the soundness of the argument. Reviewing the premises of the argument, this paper will try to demonstrate that the disagreement on the soundness of this argument is due to two different conceptions of prime matter and the unified composition of form and matter, hence the soundness of the argument. Moreover, two different conceptions of the unity of the intellect and the intelligible is provable, resulting from two conceptions of unified composition of form and matter.