Specialists concentrated their attention in order to determine the title and content of Avicenna's incomplete treatise Oriental Philosophy. Some thought of it as a work of mystical content and so accepted Illuminationist Philosophy as its title. With the publication in 1925 by C. A. Nallino's article, and more recently in 1988, by the work of D. Gutas, this was not unanimously accepted. The mysticism in Avicenna's work however continued to be studied in his other texts. In the 1950s Henry Corbin revived the polemic around the title of this controversial work of Avicenna and developed a Hermeneutic of an Oriental-Illuminationist Philosophy and in this line of thought also the interpretation of three of Avicenna's epistles. This was refuted by Amelie-Marie Goichon in her study of Hayy ibn Yaqzan, one of the three epistles studied by Corbin. I present here the history of the polemic around the title of this partially lost treatise of Avicenna, the Oriental Philosophy. Related to this matter is the East-West conception in the Avicennian studies. Corbin and Goichon follow distinct methods in their interpretation of Hayy ibn Yaqzan: Goichon follows the Aristotelian paradigm and Corbin elaborates a Hermeneutic based on Phenomenology in order to explain the symbology of the soul's journey towards knowledge.2130217245