Ta'wil

• Baha' al-Din Khorramshahi.
• Maulana Syed Abu A'la Maududi.
• Allamah Tabatabai.

In The Message of Thaqalayn - Vol. 3, No.3 Autumn 1997/1418, Baha' al-Din Khorramshahi writes:

Is the Ta 'wil of the Qur'an Known Only to God?

This question, which has been posed by Muslims since the era of the revelation of the Qur' an, has been answered in two ways. Most scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah believe that the ta 'wil of the Qur' an, that is, its inner and esoteric meanings and interpretation of ambiguous and difficult verses of the Qur' an, known as the mutashabihat, are known only to God. Most of Shi'i scholars and some belonging to the Ahl al-Sunnah and other sects believe that the ta 'wil or true interpretation of Qur'anic mutashabihat is also known to those who have learned knowledge of the scripture and are, as referred to by a Qur' anic phrase, "firmly grounded in knowledge" (rasikhuna fi al-'ilm). This difference of opinion arises from different readings of the seventh verse of Surah Al 'lmran. Before dealing with the main issue, we must clarify some Qur' anic terms and related issues. One of these issues is the problem of variant readings. Three terms which are involved here are mutashabihat, ta 'wil, and rasikhuna fi al-'ilm, which we shall try to clarify in the course of this article to the extent that is sufficient and necessary.

Variant Readings: In the realm of human languages, there is no script pertaining to any of the well-known languages that may perfectly represent the sounds of that language as pronounced by its fluent speakers. Nowadays, most dictionaries give pronunciation of words before describing their meanings. Obviously, the written form of words does not often indicate their precise phonetic form and pronunciation. All scripts have certain inadequacies and defects which give rise to possibility of error in reading and writing. The Arabic-Persian script is basically the original script of the Qur'an, which was first written in the Kufic hand. Later on it developed into Naskh and, in Iran, grew into Nasta'liq. In the Kufic script there are several letters or groups of them which are distinguished from one another only by diacritical marks which were not used in early texts for centuries. Even later when their use acquired currency the possibility of error in writing and reading remained and continues to remain to the present day. It is for such reasons, as well as due to the innate or past inadequacies of some scripts, such as the absence of written signs for vowels, for instance, that there arose the problem of variant readings, especially in ancient texts. Such a problem has existed even in more recent texts such as the Diwan of Hafiz which pertains to the 8th/14th or 9th/l5th century and is in fact eight or nine centuries younger than the Qur' an. Following are some examples out of scores of cases where variant readings exist in the collection of the poems of Hafiz, muhayya/muhanna; lajammul/tahammul; qisseh/wosleh; Shaykh -e Jam/shaykh-e kham.

With greater reason the same problem of variant readings rose in the case of the Holy Qur' an in the early era due to several difficulties such as the absence of the diacritical point and other diacritical marks as well the absence of signs of punctuation and a scientific tradition of writing and related rules. Given these factors, it was impossible for such a problem not to have arisen and it was actually their natural product. Differences of readings arose during the lifetime of the Prophet (of) also. The tradition of sab 'ah ahruf (lit. seven letters, meaning that the Qur' an could be recited with seven acceptable readings) refers to the same matter. The collection and compilation of the first Qur'anic codex (mushaf-e imam), a task whose beginnings date back to the time of the Messenger of God (of), was completed during the rule of 'Uthman with his efforts and at the participation of a number of eminent Companions consisting of the scribes of the Qur' an and some huffaz, who had memorized the Qur'an by heart. With the utmost care and precision that was possible during that era of Islamic history, the official version of the scripture of Islam was prepared in several copies some years before the end of 'Uthman's caliphate around the year 28 of Hijrah. One of the copies was kept at Madinah, another at Makkah, and four or five others were sent to important parts of the Islamic world, including Kufah, Basrah, Syria, and Bahrain, each accompanied with a qari and expert of the Qur' anic text. The oral tradition of recitation of the Qur' an existed from the times of the Prophet (of) and it continues to the present day. Today there are masters of the art and science of qira 'ah whose tradition goes back to the reciters and experts of qira'ah of the early Islamic eras. They are the custodians of the correct reading and recitation of the Holy Qur' an, and the present-day official versions of the Qur' an (the Cairo version and the recent Madinah version) have been written under their supervision and care.

In the history of the science of qira'ah, there have been seven readings (which go back to the seven leading qaris, the reading of each of whom has been narrated by two authorities, thus bringing the number of the readings to fourteen) and ten other readings each of which originated from the most outstanding and oldest experts of Qur'anic recitation belonging to the early centuries of Islamic history. There are many reliable books which record these differences of readings, including Al-Qira'at al-Sab', by Ibn Mujahid (d. 324/935), Al-Taysir fi.al-Qira'at al-Sab' by Abu' Amr Dani (d. 444/1052), Al-Hujjah al-Qurra' al-Sab'ah by Abu 'Ali Farisi (d. 377/987), and Al-Nashr fi al-Qira'at al-'ashr by Ibn al-Jazari (d. 833/1428).

To illustrate the character of most of the variant readings pertaining to the sevenfold or the tenfold qaris, we may cite some examples. In the first surah of the Qur'an some qaris have read al-Hamd with fathah or kasrah on the dal (thus reading it al-Hamda or al-Hamdi respectively). Or in the same surah, the phrase malik yawm al-din (in which the word m.l.k is recorded in the 'Uthmani script without an alif) the word has been read malaka yawmid-din, maliki yawmid-din, malik yawmid-din, instead of the most prevalent reading mailiki yawmid-din (in accordance with the present-day official versions of the Qur'an, which are in accordance with the narration of Hafs from 'Asim). The instances of variant readings in the Qur'an according to Dani's work, al-Taysir, are about eleven hundred, most of which are of little significance, pertaining, for instance, to the difference of pronouns and changes in verbs from second to third person or vice versa, such as ya 'malun/ta 'malun. However, the most important and significant instance of the variance in readings in the entire Qur' an pertains to the seventh verse of Surah Al ' 'Imran which we shall discuss in detail.

Mutashabihat: One of the branches of Qur' anic studies pertains to the study of the muhkam and mutashabih verses in the Qur' an. In the same way that the verses of the Qur'an are divided into Makkan and Madenise, nasikh and mansukh (the abrogating verses and the verses abrogated; of course, most of Qur'anic verses are neither nasikh nor mansukh ), they are classified into muhkam and mutashabih. The term muhkam derives from ihkam, in sense of making firm and strong, and a muhkam word or verse is one whose meaning is clear and without ambiguity and vagueness. In the words of Raghib Isfahani a muhkam verse is one which is free from ambiguity in respect of wording and meaning such as most of the verses relating to legislation (ayat al-ahkam), ethics, and moral and spiritual exhortations.

Mutashabih derives from tashabuh, meaning similarity, and derives from the same root as shubhah (ambiguity, uncertainty, doubt) and ishtibah, meaning making or becoming subject to doubt. According to Raghib Isfahani a mutashabih phrase or verse is one whose literal sense is not the same as its real meaning. According to Shaykh Tusi, a muhkam verse is one whose meaning is understood from its literal import due to its clarity and without the need of any [external] indication, and a mutashabih verse is one whose literal meaning does not disclose its actual meaning without recourse to some external guidance and indication. [l] In other words, mutashabih refers to texts of an ambiguous character that require interpretation (ta'wil) and have correct as well as wrong interpretations, as is the case with most of the verses of the Qur'an dealing with the creation, the creation of man, the heavens, the nature of Divine ordaining (taqdir), Divine attributes and acts. [2]

The great majority of Qur'anic verses are muhkam and a minority, about two hundred, are mutashabih. A number of these mutashabih verses are those which attribute hands, ears, eyes and a face to God or mention His sitting (istiwa) on the Throne ( 'arsh, and both words involve subtle complications) or describe His 'coming' or as capable of being seen. The Qur'an itself repeatedly refers, expressly or implicitly, to the qualities of ihkam and tashabuh in its verses, and the most famous of them is the seventh verse of Surah Ail 'Imran under discussion.

A question which naturally arises is as to why basically there should be any ambiguous and difficult verses in a text like the Qur'an with its superb clarity and eloquence. Would it not have been better if all Qur'anic verses and passages were muhkam, that is, clear and free from all ambiguity? In reply it must be said that the Qur'an has been revealed in the dress of human language and speech and in accordance with the normal criteria of linguistic expression. Human language contains a range of linguistic forms from simple and ordinary words and expressions to subtle, literary and artistic metaphorical forms, similes, allegories and parables, and ambiguity is invariably associated with metaphorical expression. Zamakhshari and Fakhr al-Din Razi do not consider the existence of the mutashabihat as a defect but as a mark of aesthetic excellence and as being conducive to the development of culture and science. [4] Imam' Ali ('a) states that the Qur'an is amenable to various interpretations and there is a consensus of opinion among most Qur'ani specialists, especially the Mu'tazilah and the Shi'ah, that the mutashabihat are not to be taken in their literal sense but are to be reinterpreted. Only the literalists and some extremists among the Ash'arites and Ahl al-Hadith are of the opinion that they are to be taken in their literal sense. Hence there is the famous statement of Malik ibn Anas concerning the meaning of istiwa in relation to God: ' 'The istiwa' is known; its character is unknown; belief in it is obligatory; and any questioning concerning it is heresy (bid'ah)." [6] Among the most important of early works on the topic of the ta'wil and interpretation of Qur'anic mutashabihat is Mutashabih al-Qur'an by Qadi ' Abd al-Jabbar Hamadani (d. 415/1024) the great Mu'tazili theologian, Haqa'iq al-Ta'wil by Sharif Radi, the compiler of the Nahj al-Balaghah (d. 406/1015), of which only the fifth volume is extant and has been published, and Mutashabih al-Qur 'an wa Mukhtalifuh by Ibn Shahr Ashub.

Ta'wil: In the same way as the term mutashabih was understood in contrast with the term muhkam, ta'wil is also to be understood in contrast with tafsir. The simplest meaning of tafsir is that it is a science of understanding the Qur'an or explaining the meanings of God's words in the Qur'an within the limits of human capacity. [7] The word ta'wil derives from awl in the sense of returning and reverting to something. [8] Both tafsir and ta'wil have been used in the Qur'an in the sense of exposition and explanation (Furqan, 32). Muhammad Hadi Ma'rifat is of the opinion that the word ta'wil occurs seventeen times in the Holy Qur'an;

1. five times in the sense of the ultimate outcome (ma'al; 4:59; 17:35; 7:35 twice; 10:39);
2. eight times in the sense of interpretation of dreams (12:6,21,36,37,44,45, 100, 101), and
3. four times in the sense of interpreting the mutashabih (3:7, twice; 18:78,82).

Some scholars consider ta'wil to mean foregoing the literal meaning of a text for its metaphorical sense without violating the norms of Arabic language for metaphorical usage, and in consonance with metaphorical relations, such as referring to a thing by the name of something similar to it or by its cause or that of something which is closely associated with it. [9] Some have held ta'wil to mean interpretation of mutashlibihat and the finding of a second meaning for the text which is called its inward or esoteric sense (batn) as opposed to its apparent and literal meaning (zahr). [10] In tafsir, one does not require any indication external to the text for its understanding, including any rational or theoretical explanation. But in ta'wil one stands in need of a clear indication external to the ambiguous text. Some have stated that tafsir relates to denotation ('ibarat) while ta'wil relates to connotation (isharat). Muhammad Husayn Dhahabi, a scholar of the Qur'an and history of tafsir, writes that tafsir relates to narration (riwayah) and ta'wil to critical study (dirayah). [11] The Qur'an itself speaks about the necessity of ta'wil and so have the Imams ( 'a), the Companions and Qur'anic scholars of later eras. But not everyone is competent to do the ta'wil of the Qur'an and the Qur'an itself (in accordance with evidence to be cited) as well as many traditions point out that erroneous and illegitimate ta'wil is the work of the perplexed victims of false and misleading creeds. However, a correct and legitimate ta'wil, which unravels the meanings of the Qur'anic mutashabihat, is the duty of' 'those who are firmly grounded in knowledge', (rasikhuna fi al-'ilm), that is, those who are learned in religion, who follow a correct creed, and understand the subtleties of language and discourse. Later in this article we will have more to say about the rasikhun who know the ta'wil of the Qur'an.

The Seventh Verse of Surah Al 'Imran: As pointed out earlier the main topic of this discussion is the seventh verse of Surah Al ' Imran, which has been the subject of controversy among the scholars of the Qur'an since the era of revelation. That verse is as follows:

He it is who has sent down upon thee the Book; in it are clear verses (muhkamat) , which are the mother of the Book, and others are ambiguous (mutashabihat). those in whose heart is sickness follow the ambiguous of them, seeking dissent and seeking their ta'wil, and none knows their ta'wil except Allah and those firmly grounded in knowledge. they say. 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord' ; yet none remembers but men possessed of minds. (according to the other reading, the translation of the relevant part of the verse will be as follows: and none knows their ta'wil except Allah, and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge sav, , 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord'.)

The difference between the readings consists of the presence or absence of a halt after the word Allah, in the verse. It is the most significant of cases related to variant readings throughout the Qur'an and in the history of Qur'anic hermeneutics. Both the readings are justifiable from the viewpoint of grammar and syntax.

1. In the reading involving a halt (waqf or fasl) after the word Allah (referred hitherto as the qira'ah with waqf: as opposed to the qira'ah with 'atf, or wasl), the verse means that no one except God knows the ta 'wil of the mutashabihat. In this reading the phrase wa al-rasikhuna fi 'ilm stands at the beginning of the next independent sentence. Pickthall's translation of this verse, which is on the basis of the reading with waqf is as follows:

   "He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture where in are clear revelations - They are the substance of the Book - and others which are alIegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe there in; the whole is from our Lord; but Only men of understanding really heed."

2. According to the reading with 'atf, there is no halt in the text after the word Allah; that is, wa al-rasikhuhna fi al-'ilm is in conjunction with Allah. On this basis the verse means that the rasikhun also know the ta'wil of the mutashabihat. Mir Ahmad Ali's translation of this verse which follows this reading is as follows:

   "He it is Who hath sent down to thee (0 Our Apostle Muhammad!) 'the Book' of it there are (some) verse decisive those are the Basis of the Book, and others are ambiguous; but those in whose hearts there is perversity, thy are after that which is ambiguous therein seeking to interpret (to suit their selfish motives) while none knoweth its (hidden) interpretation except God and those firmly rooted in knowledge; say they: ' 'We believe in it, all is from our Lord", but none mindeth save those endowed with (Wisdom)."

1. Those who approve the qira'ah with waqf consist of almost all of the Ahl al-Sunnah, including Ubay ibn Ka'b, Ibn Mas'ud, 'Urwah ibn Zubayr, Hasan Basri, 'Umar ibn ' Abd al-'Aziz, Malik, Kisa'i, Farra', Akhfash, Jubba'i, Tabari, Maybudi, Imam Fakhr al-Din Razi, Qurtubi, Ibn Jauzi, Abu asyan Gharnadi, Nayshaburi, Wa'iz Ksahifi, and Qasimi.
2. Those who prescribe to the qira'ah with 'atf consist of some scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah and the majority of the Shi'ah, some of the eminent among whom from the Ahl al-Sunnah are: (a) Mujahid, Nahhas (grammarian), 'Ukbari (grammarian), Qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar (in Tanzih al-Qur'an), Zamakhshari, Ibn Furak, Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Baydawi, Zarkashi (in al-Burhan), Abu al-su'ud 'Imadi, Alusi, Mahmud Safi (contemporary grammarian), and Shaykh Muhammad .Abduh; and from the Shi'ah (b) the Infallible Imams ('a) (who as mentioned in a tradition of Imam Sadiq ('a) in al-Kafi and 'Ayyashi's exegesis are reported to have said: "We are the rasikhikua fi 'ilm and we know the ta 'wil of the Qur'an", Qummi,, Ayyashi, Sharif Radi, Sharif MurtadA (in the thirty-third majlis of his Amali), Tabrisi, Abu al-Futuh Razi, Mulla Fath Allah Kashani, Mulla Muhsin Fayd, Shubbar, Balaghi, and Mughniyah. There is a third group consisting of those who maintain a neutral position and consider both the readings as valid. They include Ibn ' Abbas, Ibn Kathir, Shaykh Tusi, Shawkani, 'Allamah Tabataba'i, and Muhy al-Din Darwish (contemporary grammarian).

Reasons in Favour of the Qirii'ah with 'Atf:

1. It was mentioned that in accordance with the reading with 'atf that is, without any halt between Allah and rasikhuna fi al- 'ilm, the verse means that besides God "those who are firmly grounded in knowledge" also know the ta 'wil of the Qur'an. There is a consensus among the Shi 'ah on this reading and only two scholars from leading Shi'i exegetes (Shaykh Tusi among early scholars and' Allamah Tabababa'i among contemporaries) have held both the readings to be acceptable. That is, these two also do not reject the reading with 'atf. Had the Shi'ah been alone in subscribing to this reading it could be said that they have favoured this reading due to their veneration for their Imams ('a) and in conformity with their belief about the nature of their Imamate. However, fortunately, a considerable number of Sunni authorities (Zamakhshari, Baydawi and 'Abduh among exegetes and Nahhas among early grammarians and Mahmud Safi among contemporary grammarians, Zarkashi among scholars of Qur'anic sciences and Qadi ' Abd al-Jabbar, Ibn Furak and Ibn Abi al-Hadid among eminent theologians) agree with the Shi'i reading of this verse. That which can be concluded is that hardly anyone from among the Shi'ah accepts the Sunni reading of this verse, whereas many of leading Sunni scholars agree with the Shi'ah in approving the reading of the verse with 'atf, implying the rasikhun's knowledge of the ta'wil of the Qur' an.
2. There are verses in the Qur'an which mention those who have a special knowledge and who know the inner meanings of the Qur'an:

   "Nay,- rather they are clear signs in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge." (29:49)
   
   "Question the people of the Remembrance if you do not know." (16:43; 21:7)
   
   "...If they had referred it to the Messenger and those in authority among them, those of them Whose task it is to investigate would have known the matter." (4:83)

3. The Qur'an is a book of guidance revealed in clear Arabic in the language of the people and is the bearer of a Divine message. If the ta'wil of the Qur'an be unknowable to the learned and the erudite among the people, it would mean that God has sent a scripture containing inscrutable riddles and paradoxes, whereas the same scripture repeatedly claims to be a clear Book which removes doubts from the face of the truth. It is contrary to its own purpose. Moreover, God has commanded the audience of the Qur'an to contemplate and reflect upon its meanings, and that is a reasonable invitation only if it be possible to understand them, if not for everyone at least for the scholars and the learned in the teachings of religion.
4. The context of the verse leads one to expect the rasikhun to know the taw'il of the Qur'an rather than to be ignorant of it. As Sayyid 'Ali Kamali has pointed out if the phrase wa al-rasikhuna fi al-'ilm be not conjoined to Allah, the qualification of being well-grounded in knowledge would be pointless, as many believers lacking learning but possessing a sound faith declare, "We believe, and all of it is from our Lord" for such a belief is an essential part of the Islamic creed and is not limited to those who are well- grounded in knowledge. Hence Mujahid has said, "If the only distinctive mark of the rasikhuna fi al-'ilm be to declare 'We believe', there is nothing wrong if the non-rasikhun also make such a declaration, and then there would be no difference between the rasikhun and others.
5. If we accept the reading with waqf, it would mean that even the Prophet of Islam (s), the bearer of Messengerhood and receiver of the Qur'anic revelations did not know the ta'wil of the Qur'anic mutashabihat and such a view would be contrary to the general consensus of Muslims. However, if we accept that the Prophet (s) knew the ta'wil of the Qur'an, it would mean that he did so due to his being well-grounded in knowledge, otherwise there is no other verse in the Qur'an that may justify his knowledge of the ta'wil of the Qur'an. Therefore, as the knowledge of ta'wil derives from being well-grounded in knowledge, it follows that others too, including the Infallible Imams ( 'a) and others who are learned in religion, may also know the ta'wil of the Qur'an.
   Prof. Muhammad Hadi Ma'rifat writes that in accordance with the principle of divine grace (lutf) it is necessary that there should exist scholars who possess the knowledge of the correct ta'wil of the mutashahibat in order to defend the faith and the teachings of the Qur'an against misinterpretations of deviant persons. [12]
   Sayyid 'Ali Kamali Dezfuli has been led by his research to the conclusion that the Prophet (.s), Imam 'Ali ('a) and the other Infallible Imams, may peace be upon them, are the rasikhun par excellence. According to Prof. Ma'rifat many among Islamic scholars, especially those who have been specialists in the field of Qur'anic sciences from Tabari to 'Allamah Tabataba'i, may be included in the category of the rasikhun. Apparently, infallibility or the office of Imamate is not necessary for one to qualify for this category. However, there are traditions reported in early Shi'i sources of hadith which indicate that the Imams of the Prophet's Household are the rasikhun, and there are many narrations from Imam Sadiq ( 'a) and other Imams in which they have declared:

   "We are those who are firmly grounded in knowledge and we know the ta'wil of the Qur'an."

6. . If the argument based on Shi'i traditions be unacceptable to some people, including Sunni brothers, there is a famous tradition narrated by Shi'i and Sunni sources which is very significant for our discussion, and that is a tradition comprising a prayer made by the Messenger of God (s) for Ibn 'Abbas, the outstanding scholar of the Qur'an and an eminent Companion:

   "0 God, make him learned in the religion and teach him ta 'wil!"

   This tradition clearly indicates that ta'wil is something that can be learnt and acquired through scholarship and erudition. [14]
7. Throughout the history of Qur'anic exegesis those who have subscribed to the reading with waqf (and who therefore do not consider the learned capable of knowing the ta'wil of the Qur'an), such as Fakhr al-Din Razi, have conducted themselves in their commentaries in such a manner as if they knew the ta'wil of the Qur'an. It is sufficient for one to refer to their comments under the mutashabih verses to see that they have made greater effort than Shi'i exegetes to interpret these verses and have gone to great lengths in interpreting them.
8. For a change of flavour we may pose this question to those who subscribe to the reading with waqf : Do you consider the present verse (3:7) to be muhkam or mutashabih? If they say that it is muhkam, that would be contrary to what is quite obvious and evident, for this verse has a greater ambiguity than any other verse in the Qur'an and that is why it has been a subject of controversy among scholars of the Qur'an for more than fourteen centuries. Hence they will be compelled to admit that it is mutashabih. Then we may ask them another question: Do you try to find the ta'wil of this mutashabih verse or not? If their reply is negative, we may ask them as to how they had understood its meaning. And if their reply is in affirmative, it will imply that they consider themselves able to know the ta'wil of the Qur'an. Hence their position is self- contradictory, for in accordance with their approved reading they consider only God to know the ta'wil of the mutashabih verses. Therefore, the conclusion is that knowingly or unknowingly they agree with us, their opponents, and practically affirm what they reject verbally. Hence this controversy and dispute is merely verbal.

Notes:
1. A-Tusi, Tafsiral-Tibyan, s.v. 3:7.
2. Mubammad Hadi Ma'rifat, Al-Tamhid, iii. 8.
3. Ibid., iii. 14.
4. Al-Zamakhshari, Al-Tafsir al-Kashshaf; Fakhr Razi. Al-Tafsir al-Kabir, s.v. 3:7.
5. Imam Ali, Nahj al-Balaghah, Letter 77.
6. Al-Qurtbi. Tafsir, s.v. 7:54.
7. Sayyid 'Ali Kamali, Qanun-e Tafsir, pp. 27, 46-47.
8. Firuzabadi, Al-Qamus.
9. Ghazzali, Al-Mustas'fa.
10. Op. cit., note 2, iii. 28.
11. Mubammad Husayn Al-Dhahabi, Al-Tafsir wa al-Mufassirun.
12. Op. cit., note 2, iii. 36.
13. Al-'Ayyashi, Tafsir, s.v. 3:7; Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, xxiii, "kitab al-Imamah," bab 10, see also ibid., xcii, 92.
14. For the sources of this tradition see Qanun-e Tafsir, op. cit., note7,p.314.

Back to Top of Page

In The Meaning of thr Qur'an - VOL.I (pages 14-15) Maulana Syed Abu A'la Maududi writes:

Sura Ali-i-'Imran: Verse 7:

"It is He Who has sent down this Book to you. There are two kinds of verses in this Book: muhkamat (which are precise in meaning:) they are the essence of the Book, and the other kind is mutashibihat (which are ambigious). Those, who are perverse of heart always go after the mutashibihat in pursuit of mischief and try to interpret them arbitrarily, whereas in fact, none save Allah knows their real meanings! In contrast to them, those, who possess sound knowledge. Say, : "We believe in them because all of them are from our Lord."

"Muhkam" is that which is precise, exact, clear and decisive. Muhkamat are those verses of the Qur'an which have been so couched as to make their meaning quite plain without any shade of ambiguity. They have been purposely so worded as to make their meaning definite and precise leaving little room for misinterpretation. .These verses constitute the fundamental principles of the Book, i.e., they and they alone determine the aim and object for which the Qur'an has been sent down. They invite the world to Islam, teach morals and give warnings. They refute wrong beliefs and practices, and lay down the way of right living. They expound the fundamentals of religion and state beliefs and practices, morals and duties, commandments and prohibitions. Therefore a seeker after Truth should turn to these verses as these alone can satisfy his needs. Naturally such a person will concentrate on these verses and endeavour to derive the greatest benefit from them.

Mutashabihat are those verses in which there is a possibility of more than one meaning. Their object is to give a certain minimum knowledge about the universe, its beginning and end, the position of man therein, and such other basic things, for these things are essential for the formulation of any system of life. It is obvious that no human language possesses words, expressions, idioms etc., to depict clearly those supernatural things, which have never yet been grasped by human senses, nor seen nor heard nor smelt nor touched nor tasted by human beings. That is why such supernatural things have to be described in terms of human life. That is why the Qur'an uses ambiguous verses in human language which are liable to give rise to more than one meaning. Thus it is clear that the main benefit of such verses is that they help one approach the Reality and form a conception of it. Hence the more one tries to determine their precise meanings, the more one gets involved in doubts and ambiguities. As a result of this, one will not be able to find the Reality but will be led further away from it and cause mischief. Therefore those, who seek after the Truth and do not hanker after superfluities, rest content with the simple Idea or Reality they get from the ambiguous verses, which suffices them for an understanding of the Qur'an; they concentrate their whole attention on a fuller comprehension of the verses which are precise in meaning. On the other hand, those who love superfluities or seek after mischief, spend their time and energies in giving arbitrary interpretations to the ambiguous verses.

This might give rise to a question: how can one believe in the truth of the ambiguous verses, if one does not know their precise meaning? The answer is that a study of the precise verses, and not of the different interpretations of the ambiguous verses, confirms a sensible man in his belief that the Qur'an is the Word of Allah. When the study of the precise verses once convinces him that the Book is really from Allah, then the ambiguous verses do not create any doubt in his mind and he accepts the simple meanings which are within his comprehension and leaves alone any complicacies if and when they appear. Instead of hair splitting and probing into them, he believes in the Word of Allah as a whole and turns his attention to more useful things.

Back to Top of Page

The Concept of Al-Ta'wil in the Qur'an
by Allamah Tabatabai.

"Al-Ta'wil is derived from the word al-awl (to return). Al-Ta'wil of an ambiguous verse is its "returning base" to which it is returned. Al-Ta'wil of the Qur'an is the source from which it gets its realities. For want of a better word, it is mostly translated as interpretation, final interpretation, or the end; although these words do not convey its true connotation.

The word al-Ta 'wil is used in various places in the Qur'an:

1) And certainly We have brought them a Book which We have made clear with knowledge, a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe. Do they wait for aught but its final interpretation? On the day when its final interpretation comes about, those who neglected it before will say: "Indeed the apostles of our Lord had brought the truth... " (7:72-53).

That is, what the apostles told their people was all truth: that Allah is their True Lord; that what they call upon besides Allah has no reality at all; that the prophethood is truth and the religion is truth; that Allah will surely raise those who are in graves; in short, all the information about the unseen, truth of which will be manifest on the Day of Resurrection.

Keeping in view this manifestation, it has been said that al-Ta 'wil of a verse is the fact with which that verse conforms, and that it would be manifested later on; like the happenings on the Day of Judgment that would be in conformity with the information given by the prophets and the Books.

But this explanation is not comprehensive. It covers only those verses that describe the Divine attributes and actions, and explain the events of the Day of Judgment. But many more verses have no "facts" that would manifest themselves later on: the verses containing law and rules --they give orders, not information, and thus have no facts to conform with; the ones describing what is a clear rational proposition, for example, many ethical teachings -- their Ta'wil (in the proposed events) is within themselves, it is not to appear later; those narrating the stories of the prophets and past nations --their Ta 'wil has already appeared, it is not to appear on the Day of Judgment. And the verse under discussion is talking about al-Ta 'wil of the whole Book: i.e., Book's, final interpretation. Clearly the suggested meaning of al-Ta 'wil cannot be applied here, because, as described above, it is true for only a portion of the Book, not for the whole.

2) And this Qur'an is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the Book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds. Or do they say: "He has forged it?" Say: "Then bring a chapter like this and call whom you can besides Allah, if you are truthful. " Nay, they have rejected that of which they have no comprehensive knowledge, and its final interpretation has not yet come to them; even thus did those before them reject (the truth),. see then what ~'as the end of the unjust (10:37-39).

Here again al-Ta'wil has been attributed to the whole Book.

The above definition has been improved upon by suggesting that: al-Ta 'wil is the real fact upon which the talk depends. If the talk contains an information, then the event or fact mentioned is its "interpretation" --it does not matter whether the events have already passed, like those of the prophets and past nations, or will be manifested in future, as concerning the verses describing the attributes, names and promises of Allah and all that is to happen on the Day of Judgment; and if it promulgates a law, then the benefit emanating from it is its "interpretation". Look, for example, at the words of Allah: And give ful1 measure when you measure out, and weigh with a true balance; this is good and the fairest "in the end" (17:35). The original word, translated here as "in the end", is "Ta 'wila ". It shows that the "f'inal interpretation" of giving ful1 measure and weighing with true balance, is the benefit , accruing to the society from honest dealing. ..

But this explanation too is defective, as will be seen from the fol1owing clarifications.

First: The verse of measure and weight is clear on one point: the "final interpretation", that "is, the social benefit, depends on people's doing what they have been told -to do, that is, on their actually giving full measure and correct weight; those benefits would not occur merely by promulgating this rule. In other words, the final interpretation is a real fact (benefit to the society) that emanates from a real fact (measuring and weighing correctly).

Obviously, the "final interpretation" is a real fact; and the thing that "returns" to it, or, let us say, through which that final interpretation emanates is also a real fact -- it is not only an information or order. When Al1ah says that the verses of the Book have "final interpretation", it means that those verses narrate some real facts (as, for example, in the stories) or are concerned with actually-existing practical matters (as, for example, in the verses promulgating laws), which, in their turn, have a final interpretation. This capability of having a final interpretation is not an attribute of the speech; it is the property of the subject matter of the speech.

Second: As explained earlier, al-Ta 'wil literally means to return, or the returning base. But it is not every return or returning base, but a special type of it. A dependent returns to his principal, but the principal is not his "final interpretation"; all numbers return to "one", but "one" is not their final interpretation.

To understand it more clearly let us look at the Qur'anic story of Musa and Khidr (s). Khidr (s) used the word al-Ta 'wil twice when he told Musa: ...now I will inform you of the interpretation of that with which you could not have patience (18:78); This is the interpretation of that with which you could not have patience (18:82).

What he explained to Musa (s) was the true significance of his three actions which Musa (s) had misjudged because of his unawareness of their real purposes. The three events were as follows:

1. ...until when they embarked in the boat he made a hole in it... (18:71).
2. ...until when they met a boy, he slew him (ibid. 74).
3. ...until when they came to the people of a town, they asked them for food, but they refused to receive them as guests. Then they found in it a wall which was on the point of falling, so he set it upright (ibid. 77).

And this is how Musa (s) misconstrued these events:

1. (Musa) said: "Have you made a hole in it to drown its inmates? Certainly you have done a grievous thing" (ibid. 71).
2. (Musa) said: "Have you slain an innocent person otherwise than for manslaughter? Certainly you have done a horrible thing" (ibid. 74).
3. (Musa) said: If you had pleased, you might certainly have taken a recompense for it " (ibid. 77).

And the following are the "final interpretations" of them, as explained by Khidr (s):

1. "As for the boat, it belonged to (some) poor men who worked on the river and I wished that I should damage it, and there was behind them a king who seized every boat by force " (18:79).
2. . "And as for the boy, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by disobedience (to them) and disbelief (in God). So we desired that their Lord might give them in his place one better than him in purity and nearer to having compassion (ibid. 80-81).
3. "And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father was a righteous man,. so your Lord desired that they should attain their maturity and take out their treasure , a mercy from your Lord... " (ibid., 82).

Then he answered all the objection of Musa (s) in a short sentence: " And I did not do it of my own accord" (ibid.).

It is now obvious that the "return" mentioned in these verses is just as a punishment given to a child "returns" to his character-building -- he is punished for the "purpose" of his reform. It is this type of "return" that is meant by al-Ta 'wil in the above-mentioned verses. It does not mean that conformity which a true information has with its fact -- as the sentence, Zayd came, has with the coming of Zayd.

For further clarification let us look at uses of this word in Chapter 12 (Joseph):

1. When Joseph said to his father: "0 my father! surely I saw eleven stars and the sun and the moon - I saw them prostrating before me (12:4); And he raised his parents upon the throne and they (all) fell down in prostration before him, and he said: "0 my father! this is the interpretation of my vision of old,. My Lord has indeed made it to be true... " (12:100).

In this instance, the dream he saw of the sun, the moon and eleven stars prostrating before him "returned" to the prostration of his parents and eleven brothers. But his "returning" was just as an allegory returns to the thing for which it is used. The same is the case with the following verses:

2. And the king said: "Surely I see eleven fat kine which seven lean ones devoured,. and seven green ears and (seven) others dry; O Chiefs! explain to me my dream, if you can interpret the dream. " They said: "Confused dreams, and we do not know the interpretation of (such) dreams. " And of the two (prisoners) he who had found deliverance and remembered after a long time said: "I will inform you of its interpretation, so let me go. " Joseph! O truthful one! explain to us seven fat kine which seven lean ones devoured, and seven green ears and (seven) others dry, that I may go back to the people so that they may know. " He said: "You shall sow for seven years continuously, then what you reap leave ii in its ear except a li1tle of which you eat. Then there shall come after that seven years of hardship which shall eat away all that you have beforehand and laid up in store for them, except a little of what you shall have preserved" (12:43-48).

3. And two youths entered the prison with him. One of them said: " I saw myself pressing wine. " And the other said: I saw myself carrying bread on my head, of which birds ate. Inform us of its interpretation; surely we see you to be of the doers of good" (ibid. 36); "0 my two mates of the prison! as for one of you, he shall give his lord to drink wine; and as for the other, he shall be crucified, so that the birds shall eat from his head; the matter is decreed concerning which you enquired" (ibid. 41).

4. "...and teach you the interpretation of saying... " (ibid. 6).

5. ...and that We might teach him the interpretation of sayings... (ibid. 21).

6. "...and taught me of the interpretation of sayings... " (ibid. 101).

The word al-Ta 'wil in all these verses is used for the events to which the dreams referred. The dreamers say the events not as they actually happened but in their allegorical forms; and Joseph "returned" those allegories to the real events which they represented. The dreams were the forms, and their interpretations were the substances behind those forms. In other words al- Ta 'wil (interpretation) is the reality that is allegorically represented by the words or expressions; those words or expressions must be "returned" to the realities which they represent, if one wants to know their true significance.

The verse quoted above in the story of Musa and Khidr (peace be on them) also were of the same nature, as are the words of Allah mentioned earlier:

And give full measure when you measure out, and weigh with a true balance; this is good and the fairest "in the end" (17:35).

Pondering over the verses about the Day of Judgment, one realizes that this word has been used in the same meaning in the earlier- mentioned verses: Nay, they have rejected that of which they have no comprehensive knowledge, and its final interpretation has not yet come to them (10:39); Do they wait for aught but its final interpretations? On the day when its final interpretation comes about... (7:53). Look at verses such as: Certainly you were heedless of it, but now We have removed from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp (50:22). It shows that the vision with which man will see the information brought by the prophets and the Book turning into reality will be of a different kind -- that perception will not be like this physical perception, which we are used to in this world. Even the manifestation of the Day of Judgment as well as the governing principle of that day shall be something beyond the worldly perception of ours. (It will be further explained somewhere else.) Therefore, when it is said that the information given in the Book and tradition shall "return " to their true meanings on the Day of Judgment it is not the same thing as fulfilment of a forecast in future.

From the above discourse, it becomes clear that:

First: The sentence, "This verse has an al-Ta 'wil to which it returns", conveys a meaning different from the sentence, "this verse is ambiguous (mutashabih) and it returns to a decisive (muhkam) verse".

Second: al-Ta'wil is not a peculiarity of the ambiguous verses; it is an attribute of the whole Qur'an; decisive verses have their al-Ta'wil, as do the ambiguous ones.

Third: al-Ta'wil is not the meaning of a word; it is some real fact found outside the imagination. When we say that this verse has an al- Ta 'wil, we mean that the verse describes a real fact (past or future) or a real happening, which in its turn points to another reality -- and that is its al-Ta'wil, or final interpretation.

Note: In later days, this word was taken to mean "the interpretation that is against the apparent meaning of the word." But it is not interpretation; it is misinterpretation, an abuse of language. This wrong connotation was unknown at the time when the Qur'an was revealed, and there is no evidence to suggest that this late meaning is intended in this verse.

The Meanings of "al-Ta'wil" According to Other Exegetes According to some exegetes al-Ta'wil (interpretation) is synonymous for exegesis, explanation or meaning of the sentence. Meanings of some parts of the Qur'an are certainly known to the people. Accordingly, the interpretation mentioned in the verse (seeking to give it their own interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah) must be restricted to the meaning of the ambiguous verses. Therefore, they say that none can know, in any way, the meaning of an ambiguous verse, except Allah --or except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge.

This means that at least some of the Qur'anic verses are unintelligible; that its "interpretation", that is, exegesis cannot be understood from its words. But there is no such verse in the Qur'an; the Qur'an clearly says that it has been revealed so that an average mind may easily understand it.

A man having this opinion cannot avoid this difficulty except by saying that the only ambiguous verses are the letter-symbols at the beginning of some chapters, as their meanings are not known to the people. But, there is no proof that only the letter- symbols are "ambiguous"; and just because al-Ta'wil means to return and al-Tafsir (exegesis) also has a shade of this meaning in it, it does not follow that both are synonymous --a mother is the returning place for her children, but she is not their "interpretation"; a principal is the returning place of his dependents, but he is not their "interpretation" Moreover, according to the verse, one of the characteristics of the ambiguous verses is that perverted persons follow them to mislead the people. But who has ever been misled by letter-symbols? Most of the misguidance in Muslim community has occurred because of following those verses that describe the attributes of Allah and other such things.

Another group says that "interpretation" is the meaning that is against the apparent meaning of the word. This explanation has become so wide spread that, at present, it has become the real meaning of al-Ta'wil, while originally this word meant "to return" or "the returning place". Anyhow, this explanation is popular among the later exegetes, while the first-mentioned explanation was familiar to the ancients, whether they believed that its knowledge was restricted to Allah only, or said that they too, who were firmly rooted in knowledge, knew it; for example, it has been narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he used to say: "I am one of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and I know its interpretation."

According to this opinion, there are verses in the Qur'an whose intended import is against their apparent meanings, and those apparent meanings cause misguidance in religion as they are against the decisive verses. This statement boils down to this: The verses of the Qur'an are contradictory to each other and that contradiction cannot be removed unless some verses are deprived of their open meanings and given some such connotations that, in normal course, would not be understood from them.

This, in its turn, would invalidate the argument contained in the words of Allah:

"Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an ? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy" (4:82).

If the discrepancy between two verses can be removed only by saying that one or both do not mean what their words apparently say; that they have an interpretation (i.e., a meaning against the apparent one) that is not known to anyone other than Allah, then the verse 4:82, written above, cannot prove that the Qur'an is from Allah. One can easily remove contradiction and discrepancy from any literary or academic work of any author, if one were to change the apparent meanings of contradictory statements and give them new connotations unknown to any linguist. But such removal of contradiction would not prove that that work is a Divine revelation. The fact is that every speech -- even one that is admittedly false or is just a jumble of words - can be presented as a true fact or a serious discourse if its words were given some hitherto unknown meanings against their clear connotations. But such an absence of discrepancy would not mean that that speech was from a Speaker Who is above the changes, Whose decrees and statements do not contradict each other, Who is not liable to forgetfulness and error, Who is All-perfect by Himself and has not acquired perfection through trial and error, experience and passage of time.

The verse 4:82, proves that the Qur'an is understandable to common minds and may be pondered and meditated upon; that no verse of it has a meaning that is against the clear dictate of Arabic language; in short, it does not contain puzzles and riddles.

A third group says: "Interpretation" is that meaning of the verse which is not known except to Allah (or to Allah and the ones firmly rooted in knowledge), and which is against the apparent meaning of the word. In other words, an ambiguous verse has many meanings -- one behind the other; some meanings are showing themselves just behind the words, and may be perceived by one and all; others are far behind and none knows them except Allah (or except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge).

There is, within this group, a difference of opinion as to how those various meanings are related to the word. It is sure that all of them are not on the same level; otherwise, it would mean that one word is used in more than one meaning at the same time, and that is not permissible in language (as has been established in the Fundamentals of Jurisprudence). Therefore, those meanings must be taken consecutively. Now comes the difference: Some say that one meaning is the real one; the second is its concomitant; the third is the second's concomitant and so on. Others say that the meanings are all ranked one behind the other, as an esoteric meaning is hidden behind a manifest one. When a man speaks a word, he intends it to convey its familiar meaning, and with the same intention he aims at its esoteric meaning. You say: "Give me water to drink". You ask only for drink; but that very word is also a demand to satiate your thirst; and this in its turn is a call to satisfy a need of life, and then a determination to acquire the perfection of existence. Note that you had not given four orders; you only told him to give you water to drink, but this one demand contained in itself all the unspoken but intended demands - one inside the other.

However, no one who has meditated on the Qur'an would deny that the Qur'anic verses have various consecutive connotations -- one behind the other. But all those connotations are, in fact, various levels of the meanings of the words -- and especially so if we say that they are concomitants of the first meaning. And their understandability varies according to the intelligence levels of the readers. But this idea has no resemblance with al- ta'wil (interpretation). Remember what Allah has said about the "interpretation" of the Qur'an that none knows it except Allah. And note the fact that one does not need piety and spiritual purity to understand a complicated or deep philosophical discourse; what one requires is a sharp intelligence. Then you will realize that it would be inappropriate to say that only Allah knew the interpretation (in the meaning given in this opinion) or the Qur'an. (It does not mean that piety and spiritual purity do not help in comprehension of Divine knowledge and realities; but they are not the main foundation of this comprehension. This place is reserved for intelligence and scholarship.)

There is a fourth explanation: Interpretation is not a sort of a meaning intended from the word. It is a thing really existing outside imagination, upon which the talk is based. If the speech is of imperative mood -- enjoining or forbidding --then its interpretation is that reason for which the said commandment is given. There is an order: Establish prayer. Its interpretation is that spiritual perfection which illuminates the soul of the one who prays, and prevents him from evil and sin. If the speech is an information --of a past event --then that event itself is its interpretation. Look, for example, at the verses narrating the stories of the prophets and their peoples. And if it is an information of a present or future happening, then it is of two kinds:

1. If the subject may be perceived by one of the senses or comprehended by mind, then its interpretation is the same subject as it exists or shall exist in reality: For example, "Allah says: ...and among you are those who hearken for their sake (9:47); and: The Romans are vanquished, in a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome within a few years (30:2-4).
2. If it is a future event of unseen that cannot be perceived by worldly perceptions, nor can it be comprehended by our minds, like the affairs of the Day of Resurrection, the time of its happening, the raising of the dead and their gathering together, the questioning, the reckoning, the flying of the books of deeds etc., and like the reality of the Divine Attributes and Actions. (these latter are above the reach of time and beyond the limit of minds), then too their interpretation is the same reality that exists or shall exist outside imagination.

There is a big difference between the verses that describe these last-mentioned realities (attributes and actions of Allah and the affairs related to the Day of Resurrection) and those describing other subjects. It is possible to know the interpretation of the verses that describe other subjects; but so far as the verse describing the Divine Attributes etc. , are concerned, none knows their interpretation except Allah: although those who are firmly rooted in knowledge may be given this knowledge by Allah to the extent of their mental capacities and spiritual perfection. Still, the reality. that is. the full and final interpretation, is not given to any creature at all.

However, it is right to say that al-Ta 'wil (interpretation) is not restricted to the ambiguous verses, but is found in the whole Qur'an. Also, it is right to say that interpretation is not the meaning of the word; it is a real fact on which the speech is based. But it is wrong to say that every fact, referred to by the verse, is its interpretation, and that the past events or the future happenings are the interpretations of the relevant verses. Again, it is wrong to think that only the verses describing the Divine Attributes and the events of the Day of Resurrection are ambiguous.

For what is the meaning of the words: "and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah?" Do the pronoun "it" and "its" refer to "the Book?" In other words, does the verse say that none knows the interpretation of the whole Book except Allah? If the interpretation means real events and causes mentioned in the verses, then the above statement would not be correct, because interpretations (in the meaning just described) of a great many verses are known to many other than Allah and other than those who are firmly rooted in knowledge; in fact, it may be known to even those in whose hearts there is perversity --such are the verses narrating the stories of the past nations and the current events, and even the verses dealing with laws and ethics. Everyone can acquire the knowledge of these things, and no one can fail to understand their interpretation (in this meaning).

Or, do the pronouns, "it" and "its" refer to "the part of the Book that is ambiguous?" If so, then it will be correct to restrict the knowledge of its interpretation to Allah (or to Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge). And then it would be the import of the verse that none, except Allah (and those firmly rooted in knowledge) should seek to interpret the ambiguous verses: otherwise, the people would be misled and misguided.

But it would be wrong in this case to say that only the verses describing the attributes and actions of Allah, and those connected with the Day of Judgment were ambiguous. Misguidance is caused by misinterpretation of other types of verses too; for example, the verses related to the shari'ah and the stories of the prophets and their nations. It has been claimed by a group that the main purpose of the law is to reform and develop the society; if the good of the society depends on a law other than the one ordained by religion, or if that ordained law is no longer suitable for this enlightened era, a new law should be adopted and the religious command should be discarded. Likewise, it has been claimed that the miracles attributed by the Qur'an to the prophets were not supernatural events; they were normal occurrences, which the Qur'an narrated in a way as to put on them a halo of mystery; as a result of this dramatic style, it succeeded in attracting the attention of the audience and to make them submit to what they thought to be a superpower, above all powers. Such misleading explanations and interpretations are found in their hundreds in all the sects that have deviated from true Islam. And all are the result of interpreting the Qur'an according to one's own liking, seeking to mislead the people. Therefore, it is wrong to say that only those verses are ambiguous which describe the Divine Attributes and the affairs of the Day of Resurrection.

These are the four main opinions concerning the meaning of "interpretation" .There are some other views also; they are, in fact, various branches of the first opinion although those who expressed them have not acknowledged this fact:

1. Exegesis (al-Tafsir) is more general than interpretation (al- Ta'wil). Exegesis is mostly used for explanation of words; interpretation is mostly used for explanation of the meanings and sentences. The term, "interpretation" is generally used only for the Divine Books; while exegesis is used for other books too.
2. Exegesis is explanation of a word that has only one meaning; interpretation is choosing, with the help of some rules and reason, one meaning out of several possible ones.
3. Exegesis shows the definite meaning of the word; interpretation chooses one among many possible meanings. (It is not very different from no.2.)
4. Exegesis shows the reason of the meaning; interpretation explains the reality of the meaning. For example, look at the verse: Most surely your Lord is on watch (89: 14). Its exegesis shall be as follows: "al-Mirsad" (watching place) is on paradigm of al-mif'al from the verb rasada; yarsudu (he watched; he is watching). And its interpretation is the warning against slackening in matters of the shari'ah and thinking little of the commandments of Allah.
5. Exegesis is a description of the clear meaning of a word; interpretation is the explanation of its difficult meaning.
6. Exegesis is concerned with tradition and narration; interpretation is related to reason.
7. Exegesis is limited to following and listening (what the ancients said); interpretation is concerned with inference and reason.

These seven are in fact various facets of the first opinion; and all objections levelled against that are valid about these too. Anyhow, one cannot rely on any of the four opinions or their branches.

One defect is common to all: They presume that "interpretation" is the meaning of the verse, or that it is the happening or cause to which the verse refers. But it has been explained that "interpretation" is not the meaning of a verse -- it does not matter whether the meaning is the apparent one or is against it. Also, it has been clarified that although interpretation is a real event or fact, but not every event -- it is that fact with which the word has the same relation as a proverb has with its purpose; or as an exterior has with its interior.

Interpretation is that reality to which a verse refers; it is found in all verses, the decisive and the ambiguous alike; it is not a sort of a meaning of the word; it is a real fact that is too sublime for words; Allah has dressed them with words so as to bring them a bit nearer to our minds; in this respect they are like proverbs that are used to create a picture in the mind and thus help the hearer to clearly grasp the intended idea. That is why Allah has said: (I swear) by the Book that makes manifest (the truth); surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an, so that you may understand. And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:2-4). And this thing has been explicitly and implicitly mentioned in several Qur'anic verses.

Does Anyone, Other than Allah, know the "Interpretation" of the Qur'an This issue too has caused sharp controversy among the exegetes. The main reason of the controversy is the meaning of" and" , in the sentence, " and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord." Is it a conjunctive? Or, has it been used only to begin a new sentence?

Some early exegetes, some Shafi'ites and most of the Shi'ites believe that it is a conjunctive; that the verse says that those too who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation of the ambiguous verses of the Qur'an.

Most of the early exegetes and the Hanafites believe that with this "and" a new sentence begins; that none knows the interpretation of the ambiguous except Allah, Who has kept this knowledge to Himself. Both groups bring in their support a lot of academic explanations and traditions; the polemics goes on. arguements are put forward. are refuted by the opposite group. then the refutations in their turn are refuted; thus it goes on and on.

Both sides suffer from confusion about the issue to be decided. They have confused the interpretation of the Qur'an with returning the ambiguous verse to the decisive. Therefore. it will be a waste of time and space to quote here their arguments and counter-arguments. So far as the traditions are concerned they are against the clear meaning of the Qur'an:

1. Let us look to begin with at the traditions that say that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation. These traditions use "interpretation "as synonymous for the intended meaning of the ambiguous " ; but, as mentioned repeatedly, interpretation of the Qur'an is something else.
   
   It has been narrated through the Sunni chains that the Prophet prayed for Ibn 'Abbas: " O Allah! give him knowledge of the religion and teach him the interpretation" And Ibn 'Abbas is reported as saying: "I am among those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and I know its interpretation." Also he said: "The decisive are the verses that abrogated and the ambiguous are the abrogated ones." All these traditions put together give an impression that the decisive verse is the interpretation of the ambiguous one.
   
   But we have already explained that this verse is not concerned with this sort of interpretation.
2. Now we come to those traditions that show that knowledge of the interpretation of the ambiguous verses is restricted to Allah:

   a) Ibn ' Abbas is reported to recite the verse in this way: "and none knows its interpretation except Allah, and say those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it...'" The same recitation is ascribed to Ubay ibn Ka'b. Likewise, Ibn Mas'ud is reported to recite: And its interpretation is not except with Allah. and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: 'We believe in it..."'
   
   But such traditions can prove nothing: First. because such uncommon recitations are of no value at all; secondly utmost that can be shown from them is that this verse does not prove that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation; but there is a world of difference between not proving that Zayd exists and proving that he does not exist.
   
   b) It is narrated by at-Tabarani from Abu Malik al-Ash'ari that he heard the Messenger of Allah saying: " I am not afraid for my ummah but from three things: that their wealth would increase, and they would envy each other and kill each other; and that the Book would be opened for them, and the believer would take it seeking to interpret it, and none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: .We believe in it, it is all from our Lord'; and none do mind except those having understanding; and that their knowledge would increase and they would waste and neglect it." (ad-Durru 'l-manthur)
   This tradition -- if we accept that it has any relation with the subject matter -- would only show that common believers did not know the interpretation; but it could not be proved from it that those too who were firmly rooted in knowledge did not have its knowledge. And the controversy is about this latter group; it is not about general believers.
   
   c) Some people offer those traditions as their proof which say that the decisive verses should be followed and ambiguous ones should only be believed in. But such traditions have no relevance to the issue under dispute.
   
   d) al-Alusi has quoted in his al-Tafsir: al-Marfu' 1 tradition through Ibn Jarir from Ibn .Abbas that he said: "The Qur'an has been revealed on four words: The lawful, and the prohibited (none is excused from acquiring its knowledge); and the explanation (it is done by the scholars); and the ambiguous, none knows it excep~ Allah, and the one who claims to know it (except Allah) is a liar."
   
   Let us have a cursory glance at this tradition: First, some names from the chain of its narrators are omitted. Secondly, it is against the previously mentioned traditions that say that the Prophet prayed for him to be given the knowledge of interpretation, and against his own claim that he had this knowledge. Thirdly, it is against the clear import of the Qur'an that interpretation is something other than the meaning of the ambiguous.

What is, then, the reply to the question asked in the beginning? Does anyone, other than Allah, know the interpretation of the Qur'an? The answer is: Yes, the Qur'an proves the possibility of the knowledge of its interpretation to someone other than Allah; although this verse does not prove it.

Let us explain the second statement first. The context shows the theme of this verse: It wants to say that the Book is divided in two types: there is a group which, because of perversity of hearts, seeks to follow the ambiguous verses; and there is another group that is firmly rooted in knowledge and therefore follows the decisive verses and believes in the ambiguous ones. It is clear, in this light, that the phrase, "those who are firmly rooted in knowledge", is used here primarily to describe their good faith and behaviour vis-a-vis the Qur'an, and to extol their virtue in contrast to those in whose hearts there is perversity .The sentence aims at nothing else. And there is no reason, so far as this verse is concerned, to join those who are firmly rooted in knowledge, with Allah, in knowledge of the Book's interpretation. The arguments put forward in this respect are defective, as we have shown above.

In short, the restriction, "none knows its interpretation except Allah", remains valid, without any opposing or qualifying clause -- there is no conjunction, exception or qualification in this absolute statement. Therefore, so far as this verse is concerned, the knowledge of the Qur'an's interpretation is reserved for Allah.

Nevertheless, there may be other proofs to show that someone, other than Allah, may be knowing this interpretation. There are in the Qur'an instances in which an absolute restriction of one verse has been qualified by another. Take the example of the knowledge of the unseen. The Qur'an has declared in many verses that it is confined to Allah:

Say: "No one in the heavens and the earth knows the unseen but Allah" (27:65).
Say: "The unseen is only for Allah " (10:20).
And with Him are the keys of the unseen - none knows thembut He (6:59).

And after all these restricting statements, comes the following verse:

The Knower of the unseen! so He does not reveal His secrets to any, except to him whom He chooses of an apostle." (72:26-27).

This verse clearly says that some persons other than Allah, that is, the chosen apostles, are given the knowledge of the unseen.

Now time has come to discuss the first statement: Other verses of the Qur'an prove that it is possible for someone, other than Allah, to have the knowledge of the Qur'an's interpretation:

As repeatedly explained, interpretation is a real fact existing outside imagination, and the meaning of the verse has the same relation with it as a proverb has with its purpose and purport. Interpretation is not the meaning of the verse; rather it transpires through that meaning -- a special sort of transpiration. There is a proverb in Arabic used when someone intends to do a work but has already destroyed its means: "In summer you spoiled the milk. "When it is used, its literal meaning (a woman's spoiling the milk in summer) does not fit the occasion, yet it presents a clear picture before the eyes of the audience, and that picture leads to the purpose of the talk.

The same is the case of the interpretation. There is a spiritual reality which is the main objective of ordaining a law, or basic aim of describing a Divine Attribute; there is an actual significance to which a Qur'anic story refers. That spiritual reality or actual significance is not seen in the words or the meaning of the verse --that order, prohibition, explanation, or narration does not mention that spiritual reality or actual significance in its words. But it transpires from that order etc., because the order etc., is founded on it. We may as well say that the order or story etc., points to that spiritual reality or significance. A man tells his servant: "Give me water to drink. "This order emanates from the natural instinct of man to perfect his existence. It is this basic reality that demands preservation of self; this in its turn arranges to replace what is used up in the body; this requires replenishment with food and drink; this need is announced through hunger and thirst; thirst demands satiation, which in its turn causes the man to give that order to his servant. The interpretation of the said order, therefore, is the natural instinct of man to perfect his existence. If this reality, this natural instinct, changes for any reason, the order, "Give me water", also would change.

Likewise, various societies have some recognized ethical and social norms based on what they think to be good or evil. This in its turn, depends on a set of customs and traditions that are firmly settled in the doer's mind, through heredity and environment. This compound cause is the interpretation of his action and inaction. If those social factors change for any reason, his action and inaction will also change.

A subject -- whether it is an order, a story or any other topic -- that has an interpretation will certainly change if that interpretation changes. Now ponder on the words of Allah: then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah. Note that they have been condemned because they try to give that verse their own interpretation which is not the real one; and this misinterpretation causes misguidance and makes people go astray. Had they followed its true interpretation then it could not be condemned. They would have followed truth and reality , it would have led them to the relevant decisive verses, and it would have been a praiseworthy act.

Now it is clear that the interpretations of the Qur'an are the facts actually existing outside imagination: the Qur'anic verses -- its spiritual realities, laws and stories -- are based upon them; if supposedly any of those facts changes for any reason, the relevant verses would also surely change.

This fits perfectly the purport of the verse: (We swear) by the Book that J makes manifest (the truth), surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an so that \' you may understand. And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly c elevated, full of wisdom (43:2-4). This verse shows that the Qur'an, when it was with Allah, was too precise and firm to admit any break or fragmentation. But Allah, because of His mercy, made it into a Book to be recited, and clothed it with Arabic language, so that people may understand what they could not comprehend as long as it was in the original, or basis, of the Book. This original or basis of the Book has been mentioned in these verses:

Allah effaces what He pleases and establishes (likewise), and with Him is the basis of the Book (13:39); Nay! it is a glorious Qur'an, in a guarded tablet (85:21-22).

And in a general way the following verse also proves it:

(This is) a Book, whose verses were confirmed (or, made decisive), then they were divided, from one Wise, All-aware (11:1). The confirmation and decisiveness refers to its condition when it was with Allah without any fragmentation or break, and the division refers to that state when it was made into chapters and verses and was revealed to the Prophet.

This last condition (division), which is based on the first (confirmation), is mentioned in the verse:

And a Qur'an which We revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We sent it down (i.e., revealed it) in portions (17:106). It is clear that the Qur'an, in its original, was undivided, then it was made into portions and sent down piecemeal and revealed gradually.

The above statement does not mean that the whole Qur'an, when it was with Allah, was arranged in chapters and verses, a sort of a book written and bound, and then it was divided into pieces and sent to the Prophet a little bit at a time, so that he might read to the people by slow degrees, as a teacher divides a book in portions and teaches the student every day a portion according to his mental capacity. There is a basic difference between revealing the Qur'an to the Prophet in portions and Teaching a student a book, piece by piece. The verses were revealed according to the events that had a bearing on their revelation. But there is no such thing in teaching of a student. Various pieces that are to be taught to a student may be, and are, gathered and put together in a book form beforehand; then the teacher teaches a piece or a portion every day, as he thinks fit. But it cannot be said about many Qur'anic verses, such as the following: So forgive them and pass over them (5:13); fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you (9: 123); Allah has surely heard the plea of her who pleads with you about her husband and complains to Allah (58:1); Take alms out of their wealth, you would cleanse them and purify them thereby (9:103); there are numerous such verses. It is not possible to ignore the reasons and occasions that resulted in their revelation; one cannot arbitrarily say that this or that verse was revealed in the earlier or later days of the Call, discarding the reasons of its revelation. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Qur'an was with Allah in chapters and verses, as we know it today.

And it shows that the "Qur'an" mentioned in the verse, "And a Qur'an which We revealed in portions", refers to a Qur'an other than this one which is made of chapters and verses.

What one understands from the above verses, is that there is something, beyond this Qur'an which is read and understood by us. And that "something" has the same relation with this Qur'an as the spirit has with the body, or as the significance of a proverb has with that proverb. It is that. spirit of this Qur'an which is called by Allah as: the confirmed (or wise) Book (10:1). The Qur'anic teachings and meanings depend upon it. That spirit of the Qur'an is not made of words or words' meanings.

The above-mentioned characteristics of the spirit of the Qur'an are the same as those of the "interpretation" of the Qur'an. The above discourse makes it even clearer; and makes us realize why it is said that the interpretation of the Qur'an cannot be even touched by common minds and unclean spirits.

Then Allah says: Most surely it is an honoured Qur'an, in a Book that is hidden; none do touch it save the purified ones (56:77:79). These verses clearly say that the purified servants of Allah do touch the honoured Book which is hidden and protected from any change; minds cannot reach it, because that also would be a sort of a change. Anyhow, the purified ones do touch it -- the only meaning of the words -- "touch " in this context is that they know it and understand it. Also, it is known that this hidden Book is the same "basis of the Book" and "original of the Book" mentioned in the verses:

Allah effaces what He pleases and establishes (likewise), and with Him is the basis of the Book (13: 39); and surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom (43:4).

Those are the people whose heart are purified; and this purification emanates from none other than Allah, because He has attributed this purifying to Himself:

Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanliness from you, O People of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying (33:33); ...but He intends to purify you (5:6). Wherever in the Qur'an, the spiritual purification is mentioned, Allah has attributed it to Himself or to His permission. what is this purity ? It is removal of impurity and uncleanliness from the heart. What is meant by "heart" in this context? [t is the means of perception, understanding and will. The purity of heart, then, .is the purity of the soul in knowledge and belief as well as in will. Thus, the heart remains finn in its true beliefs, without any doubt or confusion; and this firmness makes it steadfast in following and acting upon that true belief and knowledge, obeying the commandments of Allah, without deviating to the path of desire, without breaking the covenant of knowledge. Such a man is said to be firmly rooted in knowledge. Because the same are the characteristics, described by Allah, of those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. Allah has praised them that they are rightly guided and steadfastly firm on what they know; that there is no perversity in their hearts and they do not seek to mislead the people. These are the same characteristics as of the purified ones. It means that the purified ones are firmly rooted in knowledge.

But there is a fine distinction that should not be overlooked. What has been proved above is this:

The purified ones know the interpretation of the Qur'an; and it is a concomitant of their purity that they are also firmly rooted in knowledge --because that purification is attributed to Allah Who cannot fail in what He intends.

But it does not mean that the knowledge of the Qur'anic interpretation is given to them because of their being firmly rooted in knowledge, In other words, the firmly rooted knowledge is not the cause of their knowledge of the Qur'anic interpretation, because the verse does not prove it; rather it may be inferred from its context that they were not conversant with that interpretation:

" (they) say: 'We believe in it, it is all from our Lord' " .Moreover, Allah has praised some of the people of the Book that they were firmly rooted in knowledge, and has extolled them for their acceptance of true faith and good deeds; and still it does not show that they knew the interpretation of the Book. The relevant verse is as follows: But those firmly rooted in knowledge among them as well as the believers believe in what has been sent down to you and what has been sent down before you... (4:162).

Also, it should be noted that the verse: None do touch it save the purified ones (56:79), proves only that the purified ones "touch" the hidden Book; in other words, they know the interpretation of the Qur'an to a certain extent. But it does not say that they have comprehensive knowledge of its complete interpretation, or that they are not unacquainted of any portion of its interpretation at any time. The verse is silent on this matter. If it is to be proved, some other evidence should be brought for it.

Footnote 1) al-Marfu': is a tradition in which a narrator mentions the names of persons from whom he narrates, but a later narrator omits his/their names. (tr.)

* The present article is extracted from Allamah's book "Al-Mizan- translated into English by Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi.

Back to Top of Page

After reading about Ta 'wil in the Holy Qur'an, you might find the following of interest:

• The Qur'ânic Manuscripts In Museums, Institutes, Libraries & Collections: The Museums, Institutes & Collections that contain Qur'ânic manuscripts from 1st century of Hijra onwards.
• The Demand of the Qur'an for a Direct Confrontation: From the very first day that the Prophet began preaching his message of monotheism, he summoned people also to a realistic vision of the world. When inviting them to faith, he addressed their wisdom and intelligence and called on them to use their eyes and their ears to perceive the truth.
• Do we deserve the Qur'an ? The student of the Qur'an will find out that, Qur'an is telling us that the messengers of Allah will lead the people from darkness into the light and that nowhere in the Qur'an does Allah tell us a story of a community misled by its messenger or given the wrong teachings by him.

• Return to Holy Qur'an Resources on the Internet Home Page