Al Imran: (7) It is He Who sent down...

Issue 1: Connection of the Verse to the Preceding One

We have previously discussed two possibilities regarding the connection between the preceding verse, "Indeed, nothing is hidden from Allah in the earth or in the heaven," and this verse:

1. Confirmation of His Sustaining Power (Qayyumiyyah): The preceding statement confirms that Allah sustains and manages all affairs.
2. Rebuttal to Christian Doubts: It serves as a response to the doubts raised by the Christians.

If we follow the first possibility (Confirmation of Sustaining Power): Allah intends to show that He sustains the welfare of creation, which is twofold: physical and spiritual.

• Physical Welfare: The noblest aspect is the perfect formation and balance of the physical structure, as mentioned in: "It is He Who shapes you in the wombs" (Al Imran: 6).
• Spiritual Welfare: The noblest aspect is knowledge, through which the spirit becomes like a polished mirror reflecting the forms of all existing things. This is what is meant by: "It is He Who sent down to you the Book."

If we follow the second possibility (Rebuttal to Doubts): Among the Christian doubts was their reliance on verses describing Jesus (peace be upon him) as "the Spirit of Allah and His Word." Allah clarifies in this verse that the Quran contains both Muhkamat (clear/decisive verses) and Mutashabihat (allegorical/ambiguous verses). Relying solely on the Mutashabihat is impermissible. This connection is exceptionally sound and appropriate.

Issue 2: The Quran's Classification as Muhkam and Mutashabih

The Quran indicates that it is entirely Muhkam, entirely Mutashabih, and that some parts are Muhkam while others are Mutashabih.

Linguistic Meaning:

• Muhkam: Arabs use ḥākamtu and aḥkamtu to mean "to restrain" or "to prevent." A judge (ḥākim) prevents the oppressor from injustice. The bit (ḥikmat al-limām) restrains the horse from agitation. In a Hadith, it means: "Manage the orphan as you manage your own children" (i.e., prevent him from corruption). Jarir said: "Restrain your fools." A bina'un muḥkam is a strong structure that prevents intrusion. Wisdom (ḥikmah) is named so because it prevents one from doing what is improper.
• Mutashabih: This means one thing resembles another to the extent that the intellect fails to distinguish between them. Allah says: "The cows look alike to us" (Al-Baqarah: 70). He describes the fruits of Paradise as: "and they are brought forth similar in appearance" (Al-Baqarah: 25)—meaning similar in look but different in taste. Allah also says: "Their hearts are alike" (Al-Baqarah: 118). From this, one says ishtabaha al-amrān (the two matters became confused) when one cannot differentiate them. People who use trickery are called ashāb al-shubah (people of resemblance). The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "What is lawful is clear, and what is unlawful is clear, and between them are ambiguous matters (mutashābihāt)," or in another narration, mushtabihāt.

Because the intellect fails to distinguish between two similar things, anything that a person cannot grasp is termed mutashābih, applying the name of the cause (resemblance) to the effect (lack of knowledge). Similarly, mushkil (problematic) is named so because it becomes mushkal (entering the form of another, thus resembling it). Furthermore, anything obscure is called mushkil, even if its obscurity isn't due to resemblance. It might also mean that the intellect cannot determine whether its existence or non-existence is true, as the judgment for its existence is equal in the mind to the judgment for its non-existence, with no clear preference. Thus, the unknown is called mutashābih.

This is the precise definition of Muhkam and Mutashabih linguistically.

People have offered many interpretations for Muhkam and Mutashabih. We will present the summarized view held by the majority of verified scholars, followed by other opinions.

A word assigned to a meaning either admits other meanings or it does not.

1. If the word is assigned to one meaning and admits no other, this is Naṣṣ (explicit/unambiguous).
2. If it admits other meanings, two cases arise:
   • Case A: One meaning is stronger (rājiḥ) than the other. The word is considered Ẓāhir (apparent) concerning the stronger meaning, and Mu'awwal (interpreted) concerning the weaker one.
   • Case B: Both meanings are equally probable. The word is Mushtarak (equivocal) concerning both, and Mujmal (general/vague) concerning the specification of either one.

From this division, a word is either Naṣṣ, Ẓāhir, Mu'awwal, Mushtarak, or Mujmal.

• Naṣṣ and Ẓāhir share the characteristic of having a preferred meaning. However, Naṣṣ is preferred and prevents other meanings, while Ẓāhir is preferred but does not prevent other meanings. This shared characteristic is what is termed Muhkam.
• Mujmal and Mu'awwal share the characteristic that the word's indication toward them is not preferred (not rājiḥ). Although not preferred, they are not actively rejected (not marjūḥ). The Mu'awwal meaning, while not preferred, is weaker than the Ẓāhir meaning, but not due to the isolated evidence. This shared characteristic is termed Mutashabih, as the lack of clear understanding is present in both categories. We established that this lack of understanding is called mutashābih either because the unknown resembles affirmation and negation in the mind, or because the state of resemblance leads to the unknown (applying the cause to the effect).

This is the comprehensive discussion on Muhkam and Mutashabih.

When Meanings are Equally Probable (Mujmal): The intellect pauses here, such as the word Qur' (which can mean menstruation or purity).

When the Apparent Meaning is Rejected: This occurs when the word, by its original setting, favors one meaning but that favored meaning turns out to be false, while the weaker meaning is true.

• Example 1: "And when We decide to destroy a town, We command its affluent ones, and they commit transgression therein; so the word is justified against it..." (Al-Isrā': 16). The apparent meaning suggests Allah commands transgression, which contradicts the Muhkam verse: "Indeed, Allah does not command immorality" (Al-A'rāf: 28).
• Example 2: "They forgot Allah, so He made them forget themselves" (At-Tawbah: 67). The apparent meaning of nisyān (forgetting) is the opposite of knowledge, implying weakness. The Muhkam verses refute this: "Your Lord is never forgetful" (Maryam: 64) and "My Lord neither errs nor forgets" (Ṭā-Hā: 52).

The Principle for Resolving Disputes: Every school of thought claims the verses supporting their doctrine are Muhkam, and those opposing them are Mutashabih. For instance, the Mu'tazila holds that "So whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve" (Al-Kahf: 29) is Muhkam, while "And you do not will except that Allah wills" (At-Takwīr: 29) is Mutashabih. The Jabriyyah reverses this. We need a governing rule.

The Rule: If a word has two meanings, one preferred (rājiḥ) and one weaker (marjūḥ):

• If we adhere to the preferred meaning, it is Muhkam.
• If we shift the meaning to the weaker one, it is Mutashabih.

Shifting the word from its preferred meaning to the weaker one requires separate evidence (dalīl munfaṣil), which must be either textual or rational.

Regarding Textual Evidence: This only works if there is a conflict between two textual proofs. If they conflict, there is no preference for abandoning the apparent meaning of one over the other, unless one proof is decisive (qāṭiʿ) and the other is not, or one is stronger than the other.

• The first claim (one proof being decisive) is false, because all textual proofs rely on linguistic transmission, grammar, morphology, and the absence of equivocation, metaphor, specialization, implication, or counter-evidence—all of which are conjectural (maẓnūn). Therefore, textual evidence is always conjectural.
• The second claim (one proof being stronger) is true. However, in this case, shifting the word from its apparent meaning to the weaker meaning results in a conjectural conclusion (ẓannī). Such reliance is impermissible in fundamental theological issues (masā'il uṣūliyyah), though permissible in jurisprudence (fiqhiyyah).

Therefore, shifting a word from its preferred meaning to its weaker meaning in definitive matters is only permissible if there is decisive rational evidence proving the apparent meaning is impossible. Once this rational proof establishes that the apparent meaning is not intended, the interpreter does not need to know the specific intended weaker meaning, as determining that requires weighing one conjecture against another conjecture, which yields only weak conjecture—unacceptable in definitive matters.

Thus, the established principle is: After decisive rational evidence proves the apparent meaning impossible, one should not delve into specifying the interpretation (Ta'wīl). This is the ultimate conclusion on this matter.

Issue 3: Opinions on Muhkam and Mutashabih

Opinion 1 (Reported from Ibn Abbas):

• Muhkamat: The three verses in Surah Al-An'am (starting with "Say: Come, I will recite..." [Al-An'am: 151]). These verses encompass fundamental, unchangeable religious duties (e.g., obeying Allah, avoiding injustice, lying, ignorance, and unlawful killing).
• Mutashabihat: The letters at the beginning of certain Surahs (like Alif, Lam, Mim). These were allegorically interpreted by the Jews using Hisab al-Jumal (numerology) to determine the duration of the Ummah, leading to confusion.
• My commentary: The Mutashabih here corresponds to what we termed Mujmal—where the word's indication is equally balanced between multiple meanings, requiring external evidence for specification.

Opinion 2 (Also reported from Ibn Abbas):

• Muhkam: The abrogating verses (Nāsikh).
• Mutashabih: The abrogated verses (Mansūkh).

Opinion 3 (Al-Aṣamm):

• Muhkam: Verses whose evidence is clear and apparent, such as the creation process: "Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot..." (Al-Mu'minun: 14) and "And We made from water every living thing" (Al-Anbiya': 30).
• Mutashabih: Verses requiring contemplation and reflection, like proving resurrection after becoming dust. (He argues that if one reflects, the Mutashabih becomes Muhkam, as the One capable of initial creation is capable of re-creation.)

• My commentary on Al-Aṣamm: His statement is not concise. If he means Muhkam is what has clear evidence, this aligns with our definition: the indication of the word is decisive (rājiḥ). If he means Muhkam is what is known without proof (self-evident by necessary reason), then the entire Quran becomes Mutashabih, as even creation requires rational proof against naturalistic explanations. Perhaps he means that Muhkam evidence has few, ordered premises, while Mutashabih evidence has many, disordered premises.

Opinion 4:

• Muhkam: Everything whose knowledge can be attained, whether by clear or obscure evidence.
• Mutashabih: Everything whose knowledge is inaccessible, such as the exact time of the Hour or the precise measure of reward and punishment (e.g., "They ask you about the Hour: When is its arrival?" [Al-A'rāf: 187]).

Issue 4: The Wisdom Behind Having Muhkamat and Mutashabihat

Some atheists criticize the Quran for containing Mutashabihat, arguing that if the entire religion relies on this Book, it should be entirely clear. They point out that every sect clings to verses supporting its doctrine:

• The Determinist clings to verses implying compulsion (e.g., Al-An'am: 103).
• The Libertarian claims this is the view of disbelievers, citing verses where Allah describes the disbelievers' claims (e.g., Al-An'am: 25).
• The Affirmationist of Vision clings to "Faces that Day will be radiant, looking at their Lord" (Al-Qiyamah: 22-23).
• The Negationist clings to "No vision can grasp Him" (Al-An'am: 103).
• The Affirmationist of Direction clings to "fearing their Lord above them" (An-Nahl: 50) and "The Most Merciful established Himself above the Throne" (Ṭā-Hā: 5).
• The Negationist of Direction clings to "There is nothing like unto Him" (Ash-Shūrā: 11).

Each group calls its supporting verses Muhkam and the opposing ones Mutashabih, often relying on weak justifications. How can a Wise Being make the ultimate reference point for religion structured this way? Wouldn't clarity be closer to the goal?

Scholars mention several benefits for the existence of Mutashabihat:

1. Increased Reward: The difficulty in reaching the truth necessitates greater striving, which earns greater reward (cf. Al Imran: 142).
2. Universal Engagement: If the Quran were entirely Muhkam (supporting only one view), adherents of other doctrines would reject it outright. By including Mutashabihat, every sect hopes to find support for its view, leading them all to study the text deeply. Through this process, the Muhkamat eventually clarify the Mutashabihat, guiding the erroneous toward the truth.
3. Escape from Blind Following (Taqlīd): The presence of Mutashabihat necessitates the use of rational proof (dalīl al-ʿaql), thus freeing the seeker from the darkness of taqlīd and leading them to the light of deduction (istidlāl).
4. Necessity of Deep Knowledge: Mutashabihat require learning the methods of interpretation (ta'wīl) and weighing interpretations, which necessitates mastering extensive sciences like linguistics, grammar, and Usul al-Fiqh. Without these ambiguities, the need to acquire such deep knowledge would be absent.
5. Addressing the Masses (The Strongest Reason): The Quran addresses both the elite and the common people. The nature of the masses often recoils from abstract truths (e.g., affirming a Being that is not a body or localized). If they heard this immediately, they might mistake it for non-existence (leading to denial/atheism). Therefore, they are addressed initially with terms that suit their limited perception (these are the Mutashabihat). Later, the clear truth (the Muhkamat) is revealed to them.

Returning to Exegesis

"It is He Who sent down to you the Book; from it are decisive verses (muḥkamat)..." This refers to the Quran. Muhkamat are those whose meanings are confirmed, either by decisive rational proofs (in definitive matters) or by having no stronger counter-arguments.

"...they are the Mother of the Book..." Two questions arise:

Q1: What is the meaning of the Muhkamat being the "Mother" (Umm) of the Mutashabihat? Linguistically, the Umm is the origin from which something proceeds. Since the Muhkamat are understood by themselves, and the Mutashabihat only become understood through the aid of the Muhkamat, the Muhkamat become the mother of the Mutashabihat. Alternatively, consider the Gospel's mention of the Father: the eternal Creator who sustains creation. This concept was expressed as "Father" because the father originates the son, but translation led to the implication of physical birth. Thus, "Allah did not take a son" (Maryam: 35) is Muhkam (confirmed by decisive rational proofs), while "Jesus, the Spirit of Allah and His Word" is Mutashabih, which must be referred back to the Muhkam.

Q2: Why "Mother of the Book" (Umm al-Kitāb) and not "Mothers of the Book" (Ummahāt al-Kitāb)? This is because the totality of the Muhkamat is considered one entity, and the totality of the Mutashabihat is considered another entity, and one is the mother of the other. Similar to "And We made the son of Mary and his mother a sign" (Al-Mu'minun: 50), where they are treated as a single sign.

"...and others are allegorical (mutashābihāt)." We already know the nature of Mutashabihat. Al-Khalil and Sibawayh noted that the word ukhar (others) deviates from its sisters (like ukhrā) in grammatical rule. Ukhra is the feminine of akhar (which is on the pattern of af'al). Words on the pattern of af'al are typically used with min (than) or with the definite article al- (the). However, here, min is omitted because the word itself implies it, and subsequently, al- is also omitted, allowing akhar to be used without al- or min. Thus, ukhar (plural of akhar) is an exception to the rule that plurals of af'al retain al- or min.

"So as for those in whose hearts is deviation (zaygh)..." After establishing the division into Muhkam and Mutashabih, Allah explains that those with deviation cling only to the Mutashabihat. Zaygh means inclining away from the truth.

Who are those with deviation?

• Ar-Rabīʿ: The delegation from Najrān who argued about the Messiah, citing "Spirit of Allah and His Word." Allah then revealed this verse and the subsequent one about the likeness of Adam and Jesus.
• Al-Kalbī: The Jews who sought the duration of the Ummah from the disconnected letters at the start of the Surahs.
• Qatādah and Az-Zajjāj: The disbelievers who deny resurrection. They argue that the verse ends with "And none knows its interpretation except Allah," and this unknown aspect must be the time of the Hour, which Allah concealed from everyone, including prophets and angels.

The Verified Scholars' View: This applies generally to all proponents of falsehood who use Mutashabihat to support their errors. The wording is general, and the specific occasion of revelation does not restrict the general meaning. This includes:

1. Those who demand immediate punishment (e.g., "Bring us the punishment of Allah" [Al-'Ankabūt: 29]).
2. Those who deny the resurrection (e.g., "The Hour will not come to us" [Saba': 3]).
3. Those who demand angels appear immediately (e.g., Al-Hijr: 7). They confuse the weak.
4. The Anthropomorphists (Mushabbihah) who cite "The Most Merciful established Himself above the Throne" (Ṭā-Hā: 5). Rational proof dictates that anything occupying space must either be infinitely small (impossible) or divisible/composite (meaning it is contingent and created). Thus, the apparent meaning is impossible, making the verse Mutashabih.
5. The Mu'tazila, who cite apparent verses supporting total delegation of action to the servant. Rational proof shows that action depends on a motive (dāʿī), and if that motive originates from Allah, the action becomes necessary upon its occurrence and impossible upon its absence. This refutes total delegation, proving all action is by Allah's decree. Thus, the Mu'tazila's reliance on these apparent verses is reliance on Mutashabihat.

Allah clarifies that all these groups, who turn away from decisive proofs and cling to misleading appearances, do so because they have deviation (zaygh) in their hearts, seeking to establish falsehood.

Every sect calls the verses matching its doctrine Muhkam and those opposing it Mutashabih. For example, Al-Jubbā'ī claims the Jabriyyah (who attribute injustice, lying, and impossible burdens to Allah) are the ones following Mutashabihat.

Abū Muslim Al-Iṣfahānī claims the deviator is one who clings to verses of misguidance (like those implying Allah misleads) without interpreting them in light of the Muhkamat (like verses stating Allah wills ease, guides, and only adorns good deeds for the believer). He argues that verses like "We decreed for them, and they were made blind to the truth" (An-Naml: 4) mean Allah adorned their blessings for them, not their sins, contradicting verses stating Allah does not change a people's condition unless they change themselves.

• My reflection: Why does Abū Muslim label verses supporting his view Muhkam and those opposing it Mutashabih? He must rely on decisive rational proofs. If rational proofs refute the Mu'tazila doctrine (which requires action to occur without a deciding factor, implying no Creator, or that perfect action doesn't imply a knowing Actor), then their reliance on apparent verses is indeed reliance on Mutashabihat.

The Fair Scholar's Approach:

1. If the apparent meaning is confirmed by rational proofs, it is truly Muhkam.
2. If decisive proofs prove the apparent meaning impossible, we rule that Allah's intent is other than the apparent meaning.
3. If no such proofs exist for either side, the matter is suspended—it is Mutashabih in the sense that the issue is confused, but a strong conjecture often favors adhering to the apparent meaning.

Allah then states the two motives of the deviators: "seeking discord (fitnah)" and "seeking its interpretation (ta'wīl)."

Regarding Fitnah (Discord/Temptation):

1. Al-Aṣamm: By introducing these ambiguities, they cause conflict and fighting among Muslims.
2. Second View: Clinging to the Mutashabih solidifies heresy in their hearts, making them obsessed with falsehood.
3. Third View: Fitnah in religion means deviation from the truth, the greatest corruption.

Regarding Ta'wīl (Interpretation): Linguistically, Ta'wīl means the return or destination (where a matter ends up). Interpretation is called ta'wīl because it reports the meaning to which the word ultimately refers (cf. Al-Kahf: 78). They seek an interpretation for which there is no textual or rational basis, such as asking the precise time of the Hour or the exact measure of reward/punishment.

Al-Qāḍī's Summary: The deviators seek Mutashabih in two ways:

1. Misapplying it to falsehood (seeking fitnah).
2. Issuing a ruling where there is no evidence (seeking its ta'wīl).

Allah then condemns this further: "And none knows its interpretation except Allah."

View 1 (Preferred by us, held by Ibn Abbas, Aisha, Malik, Al-Kisa'i, Al-Farrā', and Abū ʿAlī Al-Jubbā'ī): The sentence ends at "except Allah." The wāw (and) before "And those firmly grounded in knowledge" is a wāw al-ibtida' (a new sentence beginning). Thus, only Allah knows the ta'wīl.

View 2 (Held by Mujahid, Ar-Rabīʿ, and most theologians): The sentence continues until "And those firmly grounded in knowledge." Thus, Allah and those firmly grounded in knowledge know the ta'wīl.

Arguments for View 1 (Only Allah Knows the Ta'wīl):

1. The Issue of Definitive Matters: When a decisive proof contradicts the apparent meaning of a verse (e.g., regarding the scope of obligation or Allah's transcendence), we know the intent is a metaphorical meaning. Metaphors are numerous, and preferring one over another relies only on weak linguistic conjectures. It is impermissible to use weak conjecture in definitive matters concerning Allah's essence and attributes. (Example: The verse on obligation vs. the proof that obligation occurred; the verse on Istiwā' vs. the proof that Allah is not localized).
2. Condemnation of Seeking Ta'wīl: The preceding verse condemns those who seek the ta'wīl of Mutashabihat. If seeking ta'wīl were permissible for the grounded scholars, why would Allah condemn the act generally?
   • Objection: Perhaps the condemnation applies only to seeking the time of the Hour or the precise measure of reward/punishment.
   • Rebuttal: Since Allah divided the Book into Muhkam and Mutashabih, and reason confirms this division (adhering to the preferred meaning is Muhkam, adhering to the non-preferred is Mutashabih), singling out certain Mutashabihat for condemnation while ignoring others is abandoning the apparent meaning without justification.
3. Praise for the Grounded Scholars: Allah praises them for saying, "We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord." If they knew the detailed interpretation of everything, their belief would not warrant praise, as belief in the fully known is automatic. Instead, they know decisively that Allah is infinitely knowledgeable, that the Quran is His word, and that He does not speak falsely. When decisive proof rejects the apparent meaning of a verse, they surrender the specific intended meaning to Allah's knowledge, certain that whatever it is, it is true. They are not shaken by abandoning the apparent meaning nor by their lack of specific knowledge of the intended meaning.
4. Grammatical Flow: If the grounded scholars were included with Allah, the following phrase, "They say, 'We believe in it,'" would be a new sentence, which is stylistically weak. It would be better phrased as "and they say..." or "while they say..."
5. "All of it is from our Lord": This confirms they believe in what they know in detail and what they do not know in detail. If they knew the detail of everything, this statement would be meaningless.
6. Reported from Ibn Abbas: Interpretation of the Quran falls into four categories: what no one can be ignorant of; what Arabs know by their tongue; what scholars know; and what only Allah knows. Malik ibn Anas, when asked about Istiwā', said: "The Istiwā' is known, the Kayfiyyah (how) is unknown, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation."

The Grounded Scholars' Statement

"And those firmly grounded in knowledge say, 'We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord.'"

Issue 1: The Meaning of Ruskūkh (Firm Grounding) Raskh linguistically means firmness or stability. A scholar firmly grounded in knowledge is one who knows Allah's essence and attributes through decisive proofs, and knows the Quran is Allah's word through decisive proofs. When he encounters a Mutashabih verse, and decisive proof shows the apparent meaning is not intended, he knows with certainty that the intended meaning is true, and the rejection of the apparent meaning does not cast doubt on the Quran's validity.

Q1: Why say "from our Lord" (min Rabbina) instead of just "from our Lord" (Rabbuna)? The word "from" (min) is added for emphasis (ta'kīd), as belief in the Mutashabihat requires greater affirmation.

Q2: Why is the possessive pronoun omitted from Kull (All)? The connection (iḍāfah) is so strong that omitting the possessed noun (al-muḍāf ilayhi, i.e., "all of what") results in no ambiguity.

"And none will remember except those of understanding (ulū al-albāb)." This is praise from Allah for those who said, "We believe in it." It means only those with complete intellects take heed from the Quran. This implies they use their intellects to understand the Quran: they accept what matches rational proofs as Muhkam, and what contradicts them as Mutashabih. They then know that since it is the word of the One who cannot speak falsely, the Mutashabih must have a true meaning known to Allah.

This verse indicates the high status of the theologians (mutakallimūn) who seek rational proofs to understand Allah's essence, attributes, and actions, interpreting the Quran only in ways that align with reason, language, and grammar.

The nobler a thing is, the baser its opposite. Therefore, the interpreter possessing these qualities holds the highest rank. Conversely, one who speaks about the Quran without mastery of Usul, language, and grammar is extremely distant from Allah. This is why the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever interprets the Quran based on his own opinion, let him take his seat in the Fire."

Verse 8: Supplication

"Our Lord, let not our hearts deviate after You have guided us, and grant us from Yourself mercy. Indeed, You are the Bestower."