A study of the key features of Ibn Kammuna’s (d. ca. 1285) interpretation and critique of Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi’s logical views as expressed in his commentary on the latter’s Talwihat. Though Suhrawardi (d. ca. 1191) is best known as a mystic and metaphysician, he wrote extensively on logic in the Aristotelian-Avicenan tradition. At present, his logcal views are best known from the almost satirically simplified logical section of his famous metaphysical work, The Philosophy of Illumination. However, his so-called “Peripatetic works” each contain a section on logic, the largest over 500 pages. The most widely read of these works in the later tradition was the Talwihat, usually through Ibn Kammuna’s commentary, the logical portion of which is about 350 pages. I will look at several issues raised by or in this commentary. —As the first known proponent of Suhrawardi’s views, what did he think was his significance? —What does he actually do in this commentary? While giving the “author of the book” the benefit of the doubt, to what extent does he correct him? correct omissions? add proofs to assertions? make major additions? —What are his sources, particularly among Suhrwardi’s other works? —How does he deal with the obvious differences among this work, the other Peripatetic works, and The Philosophy of Illumination? —How do he and Suhrawardi deal with classic issues in Aristotelian-Avicennan logic, such as the validity of the fourth figure of the syllogism? On the significance of this project, first, Ibn Kammuna’s commentary was an important book with more than sixty extant manuscripts. This commentary and Qutb al-Din Shirazi’s commentary on The Philosophy of Illumination were the main channels by which Suhrawardi’s philosophy was studied. Second, this will shed some light on the most vexed issue in Suhrawardi studies: the relation between The Philosophy of Illumination and his other works, a problem that is fundamental to the interpretation of his thought. Finally, it is now known that Ibn Kammuna lived at the beginning of a period of transition in Islamicate logic. Where do these two philosophers fit in relation to the major logical developments of the 14th century and later?