The theory of representation of Plato and Aristotle is the oldest theory in the field of philosophy of art, which had no rival until the nineteenth century. In the 19th century, with the emergence of new styles in painting and sculpture, as well as the emergence of new examples for art, the weaknesses and shortcomings of this theory in explaining these new works became apparent. For example, in the late 19th century and into the 20th century, Cubist, Actionist, and Minimalist painters distanced themselves so much from nature that their paintings eventually became completely unrecognizable. These examples of diverse artworks undermined the theory of representation in art. Also, with the emergence of symphonic music, the question arose as to whether this type of music could be representational. On the other hand, literature, especially the literature of the modern period, has never been able to be analyzed and explained in the framework of representation theory. Because novels are made up of words, and words are not identical or copied versions of their signifiers. Or some types of poetry, such as mystical, lyrical, philosophical, moral, etc., cannot be justified by representation theory. So in the 19th century, the theory of expressionism was first proposed by Leo Tolstoy, ending the twenty-five centuries of dominance of the theory of imitation. Gradually, German Expressionist painters abandoned the attempt to accurately represent the appearances of objects and instead used specific expressive surfaces. Throughout the nineteenth, twentieth, and contemporary centuries, numerous criticisms of the theory of representation have been raised. One of these theories is the theory of formalism, which was presented by thinkers such as Clive Bell, Roger Fry, and Susan Langer. This theory considered the inherent concept of art to be the representation of a form that signifies aesthetic experience, rather than the representation of a form.

In this research, after analyzing the theory of representation of Plato and Aristotle and quoting the most important criticisms raised, we have proposed and explained the theory of representation from the perspective of Avicenna. Therefore, the main question of this research is: What is the difference between Avicenna's theory of imitation and Plato's and Aristotle's theory of imitation? The sub-question of this research is: To what extent and how does Avicenna's theory of imitation respond to contemporary criticisms of the theory of imitation?

The aim of this research is to demonstrate the fact that Avicenna's representation theory is different and can respond to most of the contemporary challenges and criticisms of the theory of imitation And the secondary goal is to take a small step towards formulating the philosophy of Islamic art or the philosophy of art of Muslim philosophers.

The method of this research is comparative analysis. In this method, by describing and analyzing theories and then comparing them in different contexts, the similarities and differences, advantages and disadvantages of theories are discovered. In this method, the goal is to clarify concepts by comparing systems, to resolve theoretical challenges and criticisms raised.

According to the findings of this research, Avicenna's theory of representation is different from Plato's and Aristotle's theory of representation, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Avicenna has discussed in more detail the types of representation, its origin and purpose. Avicenna considers representation to be the essence of imagination. Therefore, wherever imagination exist , representation is also present. The power of imagination in the works of Ibn Sina is a power that intervenes in imaginary forms and other forms of mental stock and invents new forms. Therefore, since every work of art is mixed with imagination or imagination is the proximate origin of all works of art, it is better to analyze and explain works of art with Avicenna's theory of representation. Modern and postmodern works of art are not free from imagination, but the presence of imagination is significant in these works. With Avicenna's theory of imitation, it is possible to explain and analyze literature, as well as the various types of music and paintings prevalent in the 20th and contemporary centuries. Because imagination is an ever-present part of all these works of art.

The innovation of this research is in explaining and proving the claim that with Avicenna's theory of imaginary and imaginative imitations , it is possible to explain and interpret the works of art of contemporary centuries (modernism and postmodernism) and to provide a logical response to the criticisms raised