Ma`rifat Siyasi

Understanding how to comprehend the ideas of predecessors is one of the important research topics. This article examines the potential for utilizing three prominent methods in understanding Islamic political philosophy: Thomas Spragens' investigatory method; Quentin Skinner's intentionalist hermeneutics; and Leo Strauss' genuine historical understanding. Employing an interpretive analysis method, the capabilities and shortcomings of each method in rereading Islamic political philosophy have been explored. The findings of this research indicate that, despite possessing useful components, all three methods have limitations. Spragens' method faces the following challenges: a lack of comprehensiveness in its central hypothesis; difficulty in identifying crises and identifying theories aligned with crises. Skinner's method encounters difficulties in implementation due to the multilingual nature and linguistic complexities within Islamic political philosophy, as well as the prevalence of esotericism in the works of some philosophers. Strauss' method also faces obstacles due to its incompatibility with the existence of some bold philosophers and the absence of clear criteria for discerning the author's true intent. These shortcomings diminish the analytical capacity of these methods for a comprehensive study of Islamic political philosophy. To formulate an effective method for understanding Islamic political philosophy, this article suggests revisiting the principles and methods employed by Islamic philosophers in reading and interpreting Greek philosophy.