University of Isfahan Metaphysics 2476-3276 17 40 2025 09 23 Rereading Ibn Sina's Innovative Theory in the Conceptual and Ontological Unity of God's Attributes and a Reflection on its Criticisms Rereading Ibn Sina's Innovative Theory in the Conceptual and Ontological Unity of God's Attributes and a Reflection on its Criticisms 145 164 29461 10.22108/mph.2025.143831.1610 FA Alireza Mosadeghi Haghighi Assistant Professor, Department of Theology and Islamic Teachings, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran Journal Article 2024 12 30 To prove the simplicity of God's essence from any aspect, Ibn Sina chose the theory of conceptual and ontological unity of attributes. However, explaining this theory faces challenges: On the one hand, he has presented seemingly different approaches regarding the existential relationship between attributes and God's essence, and in some positions, by referring all attributes of perfection to God's creative foreknowledge, he considers them necessary for God's essence, and in another position, according to some general philosophical rules, he accepts the theory of objectivity, and sometimes by returning all attributes to negative and relative attributes, it approaches negative theology. Some commentators, especially Mulla Sadra, have not accepted his ontological and semantic point of view and have subjected him to serious criticism. In this paper, we will discuss the criticisms of Ibn Sina’s theory and the principles and foundations he uses to defend his theory. In a realistic analysis, it can be stated that Ibn Sina, from an existential point of view, considers the attributes of perfection necessary for God's existing nature and not necessary for its external existence. It also seems that by considering the "Functional theory of meaning", "how to conceptualize the mind" as well as Ibn Sina's special attention to the main foundations of his philosophy, it is possible to present a compatible explanation of the theory of conceptual unity of divine attributes from a semantic point of view, which is protected from the important criticism of synonyms of different words. In this way, the dependency of the attributes of God's perfection is mentioned when using words, in such a way that using one attribute to God brings the association of other attributes and not that using one attribute to God contains the meanings of all attributes. To prove the simplicity of God's essence from any aspect, Ibn Sina chose the theory of conceptual and ontological unity of attributes. However, explaining this theory faces challenges: On the one hand, he has presented seemingly different approaches regarding the existential relationship between attributes and God's essence, and in some positions, by referring all attributes of perfection to God's creative foreknowledge, he considers them necessary for God's essence, and in another position, according to some general philosophical rules, he accepts the theory of objectivity, and sometimes by returning all attributes to negative and relative attributes, it approaches negative theology. Some commentators, especially Mulla Sadra, have not accepted his ontological and semantic point of view and have subjected him to serious criticism. In this paper, we will discuss the criticisms of Ibn Sina’s theory and the principles and foundations he uses to defend his theory. In a realistic analysis, it can be stated that Ibn Sina, from an existential point of view, considers the attributes of perfection necessary for God's existing nature and not necessary for its external existence. It also seems that by considering the "Functional theory of meaning", "how to conceptualize the mind" as well as Ibn Sina's special attention to the main foundations of his philosophy, it is possible to present a compatible explanation of the theory of conceptual unity of divine attributes from a semantic point of view, which is protected from the important criticism of synonyms of different words. In this way, the dependency of the attributes of God's perfection is mentioned when using words, in such a way that using one attribute to God brings the association of other attributes and not that using one attribute to God contains the meanings of all attributes. https://mph.ui.ac.ir/article_29461_ab6bed75d60cb271552adbece0c620d5.pdf