عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]چکیده [English]
Arguments on proof for the Necessary Being are classified into three different categories from the point of view of their relation to regression: (1) proof for the Necessary through rejecting regression; (2) non-condition being or lack of regression affirms the Necessary (3) the Necessary Being is affirmed through regression principle. Avicenna's argument is the third one. The present paper is formed in three stages. In the first step, Avicenna's argument is discussed and Mulla Sadra's critique is responded by the words of interpreter of Mavaqif. In the second step, there is a new projection to proof for the Necessary Being by the other argument of third category. The final step of the research is to compare the novel argument with Avicenna's argument and to express the similarities and the differences.