Allameh considers the intellect to be the soul of human evidence, and the heart is the soul of evidence, thus the receiver of revelation; Self is evidence and it is referred to as heart or intellect. It is clear that intellect in this application has a more general meaning than theoretical and reasoning intellect. But Aquinas only believes in the reasoning aspect of reason. According to the distinction that Aquinas makes between revelation and reason, he considers the most important popular belief of Christianity, that is, the Trinity, to be outside of rational perception, and emphasizes the primacy of faith over reason. But Allameh, first of all, defines faith in the realm of practical reason, secondly, he considers reasoning and theoretical reason to be prior to faith. The common denominator of Allameh and Aquinas is that they believe about the place of reason in justifying religious beliefs; Many religious beliefs, above all the proof of God's existence, can be justified by reason (proving evidence). Both philosophers use Aristotelian rational-argumentative philosophy to prove religious truths. In this article, we will examine the views of these two philosophers about the place of reason in the justification of religious beliefs with analytical and descriptive methods.