Introduction:
The relationship between ethics and politics and political ethics is one of the old and very broad concepts in the field of human mental issues. However, in the new era and with new perspectives, its rereading has gained double importance. Today, political ethics is in complete correspondence with related concepts such as religion, spirituality, government, secularism and other concepts and forms one of the challenges in the field of understanding politics.
Al-Farabi (870-950 A.H.) has occupied a very high and irreplaceable place in the history of Islamic philosophy. Farabi's coverage of various sciences in the realm of the Islamic world is amazing. The depth of thinking and the breadth of Farabi's intellectual horizon in terms of philosophy, especially political philosophy, is exemplary and rare. He is a creative and innovative philosopher and offers new and profound products to the world and scholars of thought, including in ethics, politics and their relationship. Based on this, the hypothesis of the article is that the practical manifestation and intersection of the relationship between ethics and politics in Farabi's political philosophy should be found in some hybrid concepts. On this basis, why and how the relationship between ethics and politics is one of the problems and theoretical and practical issues of political science and ethics science, which various approaches and different viewpoints have been used to celebrate it. One of the most important efforts is related to the prominent Muslim political philosopher Abu Nasr Farabi. The hypothesis of the article seeks to answer the question of Farabi's approach to the relationship between ethics and politics based on the theoretical framework that the concepts of utopia, happiness, government legitimacy, justice and citizenship rights are the manifestation and operational intersection of the relationship between ethics and politics in Farabi's political philosophy.
Method:Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of the article is a combination of three questions and four approaches. which the article measures and clarifies Farabi's point of view towards them:
1: Three questions: The relationship between ethics and politics can be questioned in three ways. (Kechoyan 1382: 14). The first direction is whether politics, as a public sphere of human life, can basically pursue moral goals in the private sphere? The second question is whether the field of politics, ethics, or in more general terms, has its own prescriptive requirements in distinction from ethics and individual prescriptions or not? The third question refers to the field of tools and methods or the way of pursuing and applying the policies and goals of the public domain (ibid. 15). Do we necessarily have to use ethical methods in politics, or is the way of achieving and pursuing goals in politics independent of moral judgments (ibid., 15).

Four theories: On another level, the relationship between ethics and politics can be gathered and analyzed in four theories. Theories of separation of ethics from politics, compliance of ethics with politics, two-level ethics and the unity of ethics and politics (Islami 2013: 26). The fourth theory is the unity of ethics and politics (Islami 2013: 26). According to this theory, ethics is individual politics and politics is collective ethics. Ethics and politics are both branches of practical wisdom and seek to ensure human happiness.

Discussion: 
Farabi has divided civil science into two theoretical and practical parts. He considers ethics as a theoretical part and politics as a practical part. In Farabi's commentary, Ibn Rushd clearly spoke about the separation of the two sciences. But Farabi himself did not try to separate the theoretical aspect from the practical aspect. The relationship between ethics and politics was considered from several angles. From one point of view, several questions were raised to which Farabi's answer should be received. The first question was whether politics, as a public sphere of human life, should pursue moral goals in the private sphere or not? Farabi's answer to this question is positive. Unlike today's political philosophy in the West, they do not believe in the separation of public and private spheres and consider them to be the same. Therefore, it should be said that according to him, ethics and politics are a science that has a single subject and goal. According to him, the goal of ethics and politics is happiness.
The second question was whether politics, as a public sphere, morally creates a sphere independent of the private sphere with its own special logic or not? According to Farabi, the individual moral sphere is not separate from the social moral sphere, and the principles governing them and the goals and objectives of both are common. The complexity of social issues is more than individual issues, but this cannot create a distinct morality.
Another question was whether ethical methods must be used in politics or whether having ethical goals is enough and whether a politician should act ethically. From Farabi's point of view, the science of ethics is not limited to individual moral reform, but also includes social reform, and the duty of the ruler and government in the society is to develop moral values, which must necessarily be attributed to it. On this basis, from Farabi's point of view, the theories of separation of ethics from politics, subordination of ethics to politics, are completely rejected; Two-level ethics is also not acceptable and the principles governing both the fields of ethics and politics are the same. Therefore, he believes in the unity and similarity of ethics and politics, in the sense of subordination of politics to ethics (in the sense of consistent moral standards).
Farabi considers the necessity of community to be certain, but what does he consider its origin? Is it natural, natural, voluntary or rational or instinctive? Farabi, except for the first point of view, which considered social life not natural but caused by external emergency. It accepts the rest of the approaches. But in general, he has an instrumental attitude towards society and considers it a means to achieve perfection and happiness.
Farabi introduces will as having three branches. The first branch of passion comes from feeling. The second category of excitement is caused by imagination. The third branch of passion comes from speech and thinking, which Farabi calls this kind of free will. Like Aristotle, Farabi believes that moderation is a virtue.
Conclusion:
Farabi is a creative and innovative philosopher and offers new and profound products to scholars and scholars of thought, including ethics, politics and their relationship, which is one of the ancient and very broad concepts. The article measures Farabi's view on the relationship between ethics and politics (issue) based on the theoretical framework of the article, which is a combination of three questions and four approaches: the separation of ethics from politics, the subordination of ethics to politics, two-level ethics, and the unity of ethics and politics (method). The hypothesis of the article, which is the second innovation of the article compared to homogeneous articles, considers some concepts such as utopia, happiness, government legitimacy, justice and citizenship rights as the manifestation and operational intersection of the relationship between ethics and politics in Farabi's political philosophy. (innovation) Based on this, Farabi considers the goal of ethics and politics to be the same; Ethics has a political nature and politics has a moral nature. The theories of the separation of ethics from politics, the subordination of ethics to politics, have been completely ruled out; Two-level ethics is also not acceptable and the principles governing both the fields of ethics and politics are the same. Therefore, he believes in the unity and similarity of ethics and politics in the sense of following politics from ethics (in the sense of compatible ethical standards). (Findings) According to this, Farabi is a philosopher who does not find force and domination, conquest and the sword as a way to build an ethical culture. It considers happiness both in terms of belief and in relation to society. The government is morally based on public opinion and will. He based his utopia on voluntary justice based on virtue and rejects natural justice, and in his opinion, all citizens have rights and have a fair share in society. (Result)