Differences between Ratio (Discursive Reason) and Intellect

Of course, this distinction belongs to -in particular- the period of time before -what i called thus- "cartesian subjectivism". If we simply elucidate the matter, there was a kind of stratified mind understanding in philosophy circles both Aristotelian and non Aristotelian before the Descartes's Cartesian philosophy. We can find it's traces and evidences in Augustine's writings, Anselm's treatises, Aquinas's Corpus, Cusanus's De Docta Ignorantia and even in Schelling's system of transcendental philosophy in more closer times to our era is compared to others. And we also see the similar considerations in Islamic Philosophy such as Avicenna's works (al-aql al-faal), Suhrawardi, Mulla Sadra and so on.

There are some nuances between each other, but all of them have a common point:
Human mind is not just consisted of discursive reason, on an upper degree,the distinction between "knowing" and "known"; subject and object is disappeared; this is the level of intellect or al-aql al-faal. In this level there is also a cognitive process, but very different type from other.

However we must keep in mind that this mind understanding is corresponded to a specific ontological context. Cartesian philosophy and following sensationalism demolished the ontological context in question as starts off from the "knowing subject", this is an important point. For this reason, "mystical knowledge" or some "transcendental experiences" have no place in our present ontological ground. Actually they have a place, but not so legitimate place; that place belongs to the area of pathology. But on the other hand, our understanding of being also changes by flourishing physics and neuroscience; then maybe we must ask: Don't we need a new "philosophical" mind understanding is compatible with our oncoming ontology? Surely you have some ideas interested in the matter too.