عنوان مقاله [English]
This article is going to discuss on the meaning of Ibn Sina’s repeated statement that being is the accidence of quiddity (mahiyat) or its accidental feature. The commentators have always been trying to interpret that, on the basis of one of the accidental senses in categories, argument and universals. As it can be understood obviously from Ibn Rushd’s critiques, since it has always been strange and unacceptable for the philosophers and Ibn Sina’s commentators to take being as the categorical sense of accidence, the accidental of Universals were the feasible options. We have suggested that though being in Ibn Sina’s philosophy corresponding to mahiyat, has to be the accidental of universals or argument, because being cannot be essential for the quiddity, what Ibn Sina has had in his mind, is the sense of being to be 'outside, in and with' mahiyat which is taken from the accident inthe categories as conceived in Islamic philosophy.