An exploration of theological and sectarian inclinations in Tafsir
Quranic exegesis is a process that involves a variety of tools and methods to arrive at an interpretation. These methods range from lexicology, variant readings, and grammar to the analysis of asbab ul nuzool (circumstances of revelation), hadith literature, and biblical traditions. One such method employed by commentators is to understand the Quranic verses through binary classifications such as muhkamat/mutashibahat (clear and ambiguous), mutlaq/muqayyad (absolute/conditioned), zahir/batn (manifest/hidden), naskh/mansukh (abrogating/abrogated), and amm/khas (general/specific). The focus of this essay is going to be the analysis of the application of muhkamat and mutashibahat by Shii and Mutazili commentators in their interpretation of the Quranic verse 3:7.
Before going into the details of this specific verse, it is essential to have a brief insight into Shii and Mutazili belief systems. The Shias emerged as a sect after the death of prophet Muhammad in support of Ali’s claim to the spiritual and political leadership of the Muslim community. They believe that the Imams who are the prophet’s descendants are divinely guided, and thus command authority in the interpretation of the Quran. Through their tafsir of the Quran, the Imams establish a spiritual link with their faithful. According to the Shia view, the Prophet and the Imam alone know the full meaning of the Quran, since it was to them that it was primarily addressed, and through them to the rest of humanity.
The Mutazilites, unlike Shias, were not a sectarian group. Mutazila was a theological school known for its five principles which they call ‘usul-ul-khamsa’. The five principles mainly are: Divine Unity, Divine Justice, Promise and Threat, the intermediate position, and advocating the good and forbidding the evil. From these principles emerge their theological inclinations in Quranic exegesis and commentary.
Bringing the Quranic verse 3:7 into focus, the first aspect relates to its syntax. Reading the wav before al-rasikhun fil ilm as a conjunctive particle greatly influences its meaning. Shii Imami commentators read the syntax of al-rasikhun fil ilm as a second subject next to Allah in the previous sentence (i.e, only God and those rooted in knowledge know its meaning). They refer to the Imams as the rasikhun fil ilm, the true possessors of knowledge. This knowledge is directly bestowed upon them by God and is inaccessible to the rest of humanity. Those who do not believe in this authority might try to understand the Quran, but ultimately the meaning is unavailable to everyone except God and the imams. As the sixth Imam, Jafar as Sadiq said, “God made our authority (walaya) the pole (qutb) of the Quran and the qutb of all scriptures. Around it the clear (muhkam) verses of the Quran revolve; through its scriptures were elucidated and faith becomes manifest.”
On the topic of muhkam and mutashebeh, the Quran mentions it in three places. One verse says (11:1) that all of the Quran is muhkam, while another says that all of it is mutashabih (39:23). Yet another says that it is both muhkam and mutashabih (3:7). In order to look at muhkamat and mutashabehat from a Shii lens, it is important to understand the principles of jari (continued pertinence of applicability) and intibaq (analogic application) in Shia tafsir. The Quran is believed to have different layers of meaning. The literal meaning is its zahr, or its outer dimension, while the hidden meaning or its continued relevance is in the inner dimension, batn. The zahr and batn of the Quran are related to tanzeel and tawil as well. Tanzeel refers to the revelation or sending of the sacred text. Whereas, tawil is the understanding and elucidation of the Quranic text. As 3:7 says, there are verses in the Quran that has a level of meaning only accessible to God and preserved from human contact. According to Shii’s view, the Imams are bestowed with the tawil of the Quran only because they are the divinely chosen ones. So, it follows that for the prophet and Imams the Quran is entirely muhkam. Thus, the sixth Imam said: “Muhkam is that which must be followed and mutashabih is that which is obscured to the one ignorant of its meaning.” This implies that the real meaning of the ambiguous verses is only revealed to the faithful who believe in the authority of the Imam.
In one of the traditions, the muhkam and mutashabih are identified as individuals. The muhkamat are identified as Ali and the other Imams. The ones leading a clear path. While mutashabihat are ‘so and so’ namely Abu Bakr, Umer, and their followers. The ones misguiding the community. As a result, we see that there is a binary of the Imam’s righteousness and their enemies’ inferiority emerge out of this verse which further cements the difference between Shia Islam from the mainstream.
At other times, the Imams refer mutashibihat as verses that have been subject to abrogation (mansukh). The muhkam is legally relevant while the mutashabih is not, yet it is still believed in. According to one report, Jafar Sadiq said that the muhkam is which nothing can abrogate and that people interpret mutashibahat from within themselves and by their own opinion. Mutashabih is tricky and dangerous, in that people are tempted to interpret it from their own opinion. Here the principles of naskh/mansukh are not applied as they are applied generally, but they are applied as a sectarian version where the naskh isn’t carrying a meaning that has been abrogated but carrying a meaning which is at variance with one’s unaided understanding. In some traditions, the imams include the abrogated verses among the mutashibahat too. Imam Muhammad Al Baqir said, “The abrogated items (mansukhat) are amongst the mutashibahat and the muhkamat are amongst the nasikhat.
Coming to the Mutazilites, we find how muhkamat and mutashibahat are dealt with by their commentators to establish the legitimacy of their schools of thought. In the introduction of Tadhib fi tafsir ul Quran, the Mutazili scholar Al-Hakim Al-Jishumi writes that “There is nothing in the Quran that cannot be understood, for the purpose of speech is to convey meaning.” This idea takes a departure from how the Quran is understood and applied in Shii traditions where the authority of meaning is reserved for the divinely chosen Prophets and Imams. The weight of interpretation is now shifted to the human intellect and the exegetes’ skill and craft in the Quranic sciences. Jishumi also mentions that the Quran contains both clear muhkam and ambiguous verses. “Parts of it are to be understood according to the apparent meaning such as the evident and clear verses. Other parts require a search elsewhere.” Here, Jishumi does not explain what he means by searching elsewhere, but we can try to understand this better by studying his analysis of verse 3:7 in the Quran.
Jishumi says that ambiguous verses should be understood in the light of clear verses. “Its meaning is only deciphered by recourse to the evident.” He then goes on to connect this verse with the core ideas of Mutazili school. He says that the “evident and ambiguous verses involve the fundamental principles of religion, such as the doctrines of God’s Oneness and justice.” The evident verses are important in order to determine the fundamental principles of religion, but not to the exclusion of ambiguous verses, which also determine those verses. He then clarifies that the interpretation of the ambiguous verses can be done through independent inquiry. But, this inquiry is incorrect if an exegete erroneously applies their rationale on the fundamental principles of religion.
Another example of how the Mutazilis link their fundamental principles of religion with the muhkamat and mutashabihat is found in Al-Zamakshari’s exegesis. He also reads the wav in 3:7 as a conjunctive particle similar to Shii commentators. But here, the rasikhun fil ilm are not some innately special humans, but those who have sound knowledge and skill of exegesis.
For Al-Zamakhsharī, the classification of the Qur’ānic verses into muhkam and mutashabih is limited to the theological aspects of the Qur’ān. Those verses which support any or all of the five principles of the Muʻtazilite doctrines are regarded as muhkamat, while those which contradict them are considered mutashabihat. Therefore, as an example, the verses that support the idea of free will over predestination and other Mutazili concepts are interpreted as evident and clear (muhkam).
Another important interpretation of the raskihun fil ilm in 3:7 is given by Al-Jubbai. He maintains that the mutashibehaat tawil is known only to God and those firmly rooted in knowledge have no share in it. However, to arrive at this interpretation, he shifts the concept of tawil to something that will come to pass (al-mutawwal). These refer to events such as the coming of the Hour, the degrees of reward and punishment, a description of the Reckoning, and so on. By interpreting tawil as mutawwal he works around the importance of the intellectual capacity of scholars (an important pillar in Mutazali school) without diminishing it.
In these hermeneutic approaches to understanding the Quran, we observe how both the Shia and Mutazali commentators direct the function of exegesis according to their theological/sectarian inclinations. On the one hand, we learn that the Imam is the absolute authority on Quran’s tawil. And that the Imam can only truly understand the mutashebehat. This implies that the commentator’s duty is to just accumulate traditions and guide the community. They cannot exercise their own opinion. While on the other hand, we see that the clear and ambiguous verses point to usul ul khumsa, the fundamental principles of religion in the Mutazali school of thought. Here, the commentator has the intellectual capacity to understand the ambiguous verses but in order to arrive at the truth, one must remain within the confines of the fundamental principles. In both responses, we see that the interpretation of the mutashebehat is used as a tool to set oneself apart from the other. Tafsir, then, is a dynamic and ongoing process that will always evolve with the evolution of the systems of knowledge in every age.
