The science of rhetoric, as one of the most theoretical sciences, has been exposed to the ‎attention of Islamic thinkers from different fields to the extent that they have combined the ‎topics of this science with their different currents of thought. On the other hand, the history ‎of this science shows many studies about the viewpoints of thinkers in relation to the topics ‎of the science of rhetoric. What is the word "truth", as one of the main categories in ‎classical rhetoric, has always been in the focus of rhetoricians' attention, and it has turned ‎into one of the controversial debates in theoretical debates that have a direct connection ‎with the thoughts of thinkers‏.‏‎ The difference of opinion about this concept is mostly ‎focused on the intellectual approaches of rhetoric scholars in relation to the scope of the ‎concept of truth and permission, which is expressed in the science of rhetoric with the terms ‎‎"hadd al-haqiqah" and "hadd al-majaz". The division and emphasis on the concept of "truth" ‎by some theorists became the main source of these differences. On the other hand, truth is ‎necessary as a tool to know the reality of the thought of partial thinkers. Hence; The ‎requirement of this type of knowledge is their precise understanding and idea of what the ‎truth is, and this idea can be considered as the intellectual infrastructure of thinkers in their ‎general approach.‎
Therefore Explaining the concept of "truth" in rhetoric has always been the focus of Islamic ‎thinkers and researchers; But most of the studies have been restricted to quoting the views ‎of rhetoricians, and criticizing the opinions of thinkers has not been the focus of them. ‎Yahya bin Hamzah Alavi (749 AH), one of the classical theorists, explains the concept of ‎‎"truth" in the rhetorical book "Al-Taraz; al-Mutzimin al-asrar al-balagha wa alum haqaiqa ‎al-Ijaz" while criticizing the opinions of most rhetorical scholars. With the aim of ‎understanding Alavi's intellectual system, relying on his theoretical discussions about ‎‎"truth", this article tries to show the duality governing his thought using a qualitative ‎approach and descriptive-analytical method. ‎
Methodology
The current research, based on the approaches governing the rhetoric and knowledge of ‎Alevi thought, and with the main goal that the concept of truth can be a determining ‎element for knowing the Alevi intellectual system, is trying to negate his evolutionary ‎approach. to pay It is worth mentioning that the focus of the current research was on the ‎theoretical issues that are considered the intellectual foundation of rhetoric scholars, and on ‎the other hand, the main reliance was on deriving Alavi's opinions from the core of his ‎objections to other classical thinkers, which in the discussion To some extent, these ‎objections are investigated.‎

Results and Discussion

The concept of "truth" and how to explain it is one of the basic themes in the science of ‎rhetoric that has attracted the attention of many thinkers of Arab-Islamic heritage. Since the ‎category of truth is a tool for knowing the reality of a thinker's thought; Therefore, to ‎understand his thought, it is necessary to have a precise understanding of his idea of what ‎truth is, and this idea can be considered as the intellectual support of the thinker in his ‎general approach. Among the theorists who had important opinions in this field is Yahya ‎bin Hamza Alavi, as one of the thinkers attributed to the evolutionary approach and the ‎author of the book "Al Taraz‏".‏‎.‎
Analyzing his opinions in this regard, relying on the main axes such as "Al-Wawaf", "Al-Wawaf al-‎Asala", "Al-Haqiqa al-Linguistic", "Language al-Wawaf", "Al-Mawwaizah", "Usage in the original ‎topic", and "Original meaning" ", which has become the cornerstone of Alavi's views and highlights ‎his conflicting thoughts, indicate that Alavi examines the concept of truth in two stages‏:‏
A: According to the validity of the statement, which is referred to as the first type of ‎matching implication. First, he emphasized the invalidity of this category as a criterion for ‎determining the truth of the word and excluded it from the scope of truth, and he established ‎this invalidity even in the thought of Jurjani and Ibn Jani. Is. In a way, at this stage, he ‎believes that the truth does not apply to the word before it is used, and there is no transfer of ‎meaning in it‏.‏
B: According to the term of discourse, which is referred to as the second type of ‎congruent implication. He considered this category as a criterion for determining the truth ‎of the word; That is, the word is subject to the concept of truth after being used; Because it ‎is at this stage that the transfer of meaning takes place, even though in another topic, by ‎giving validity to the position of the narrator (the first type of matching implication), he is ‎required to violate such a point of view.‎
Alevi's controversy between the validity of the author's position or the term of discourse, ‎has led to a kind of duality and conflict-speak surrounding his opinions around the concept ‎of truth. By stipulating the adverbial condition to the adverb of use, he somehow ‎distinguishes between the first and second types of concordance, and he tries to define the ‎adverb of use in the idiom of discourse; It means to advance the use of the word in lexical, ‎customary and religious contexts‏.‏‎ On the other hand, Alavi has put the initial position of the ‎word or the first type of matching signification as the introduction of the term ḥathab; But ‎in defining a type of truth (Sharia) by relying on axes, he negates this point of view and ‎advances the first and second types of compatibility in the same direction; Therefore, with ‎such an approach, it is required to violate the clause of use, invalidate the mode of the ‎author, not to convey the meaning in the first type of concordance, and even object to ‎Jarjani and Ibn Jani. According to the above points of view, in the theoretical debates that ‎are closely related to Alavi