Critique of Lexicons and the Necessity of Deriving Meanings

It is not necessarily fixed. For example, a mountain rooted in the ground (كَجَبَلٍ رَاسِخٍ) is called “firm,” but a mere wall that is stable (جِدَارٌ ثَابِتٌ) is not considered firm, because it lacks a natural and deep root.
Key point: “Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm” are those whose knowledge is deeply rooted and naturally grounded in divine cognition, not merely superficially stable. This rootedness distinguishes them from other scholars.

Critique of Lexicons and the Necessity of Deriving Meanings

Lexicons, due to imprecision in derivation and semantic indication, often function like journalistic reports and cannot serve as a scholarly basis for understanding Qur’anic meanings. They are collections of scattered opinions in usage, lacking deep and systematic analysis. Therefore, a religious scholar must extract the meanings of words through derivation and ijtihad, whether in jurisprudence, philosophy, or Qur’anic exegesis.
This critique is analogous to attempting to find treasure using an incomplete map. Lexicons merely provide general outlines in usage, whereas one must explore independently to reach the depth of meaning.

The Inseparable Relationship of Rasikhun fi al-Ilm with Qur’anic Interpretation

Ta’wil, the exposition of the inner meanings of the verses, requires deep rootedness in knowledge. “Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm” are those who, due to their natural penetration in divine cognition, are capable of understanding and elucidating ta’wil. This rootedness, like the roots of a mountain in the ground, is of the essence and differs from mere superficial stability.

Distinguishing Natural and Unnatural Firmness

The rooting of a tree in the ground is unnatural, because the tree is not of the same essence as the earth, whereas the rooting of a mountain in the ground is natural and intrinsic, as both share the same essence. This analogy beautifully illustrates the relationship between the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them). The relationship between the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt is like that of a mountain and the ground: intrinsic and inseparable. This connection is confirmed in the well-known narration: “They shall not separate until they meet me at the Pool of Kawthar.”
Key point: The relationship between the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt is intrinsic and natural, marking them as Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm and true interpreters of the Qur’an.

The Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) as the Speaking Qur’an

The Ahl al-Bayt are introduced as the “Speaking Qur’an,” indicating their deep congruity and continuity with the Qur’an. This relationship, like the roots of a mountain in the ground, is of the same essence and enables them to elucidate both the apparent and hidden meanings of the Qur’an.

Exegetical Narrations and the Status of the Ahl al-Bayt as Rasikhun

In Tafsir Burhan (Vol. 1, p. 270), approximately fourteen narrations under the verse of ta’wil attribute “Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm” to the Ahl al-Bayt. For example:
Narration from Imam Baqir (peace be upon him):
نَحْنُ رَاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ وَنَحْنُ نَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ (We are firm in knowledge, and we know its ta’wil.)
Narration from Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him):
نَحْنُ قَوْمٌ فَرَضَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ طَاعَتَنَا لَنَا الْأَنْفَالُ وَلَنَا صَفْوَةُ الْمَالِ وَنَحْنُ رَاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ (We are a people whose obedience God has made obligatory; the spoils of war and the best of wealth belong to us, and we are firm in knowledge.)
Narration from the Prophet (peace be upon him):
لَيْسَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ آيَةٌ اِلاَّ وَلَهَا ظَهْرٌ وَبَطْنٌ وَلاَ مِنْهَا حَرْفٌ اِلاَّ وَلَهُ حَدى وَمَطْلَعٌ عَلَى ظَهْرِ الْقُرْآنِ (No verse of the Qur’an exists without an apparent and hidden aspect, and no letter exists without a limit and position in the apparent Qur’an.)
These narrations confirm the status of the Ahl al-Bayt as Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm and as knowledgeable interpreters of the Qur’an. They are not only interpreters of the apparent Qur’an but also of its inner meanings.

The Relationship Between Firmness and Ta’wil

Ta’wil, meaning the exposition of the inner meaning, is directly proportional to the degree of firmness in knowledge. The deeper the rootedness, the greater the ability for ta’wil. Without firmness, ta’wil leads to misguidance, whether by Shi’a or Sunni scholars.
Key point: Ta’wil without rootedness is like hammering a nail without it being anchored in the ground. Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm, due to their natural penetration in knowledge, can elucidate the inner meaning of the Qur’an.

Critique of Non-Scientific Appeals and the Necessity of Scholarly Reasoning

The view that restricts ta’wil exclusively to God, due to the absence of literary and linguistic reasoning, is considered non-scientific. This view relies on controversy and polemics rather than argumentation, and it is inconsistent with the principles of rhetoric and verse context.
Narrations serve not merely because of infallibility but as scholarly expositions. They support the principle of conjunction and reject restrictive interpretations, aligning with the divine speech from a literary and linguistic perspective.
This approach is akin to a sage speaking before an unlearned speaker. The narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt illuminate the correct understanding of the Qur’an like a torch in darkness.

The Importance of Unity Through Scholarly Dialogue

Shi’a scholars must present their views with reasoning in scholarly and literary debates while maintaining unity and respect for other Muslims. The debate on conjunction and restriction exemplifies such discussions.
Previously, lack of political authority hindered Shi’a scholars from strongly articulating religious knowledge. Today, with authority, Shi’a scholars must seize the opportunity to present their scholarly views globally. This authority is like wings allowing Shi’a thought to soar toward knowledge and truth.
Key point: A single conjunction in the verse of ta’wil can create profound differences in theological and scholarly understanding. Shi’a scholars must clarify this truth to the Islamic world through linguistic and scholarly reasoning.

“Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm” in the Qur’an

The concept of “Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm” is a key to understanding Qur’anic knowledge, with unique depth and complexity. Literary analysis indicates that the conjunctive reading of the verse وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ is superior to the restrictive reading due to semantic and structural coherence. Linguistically, the distinction between “firm” and “stable” emphasizes the naturally rooted essence of the Rasikhun in divine knowledge. Narrations, especially from the Ahl al-Bayt, affirm their status as Rasikhun and true Qur’anic interpreters.
This analysis underscores the necessity of a scholarly and reasoned approach to Qur’anic exegesis and invites Shi’a scholars to present their views globally with logic and evidence.
Like a tree rooted in the soil of truth, Rasikhun fi al-‘ilm penetrate the inner knowledge and elucidate the Qur’an for humanity. The present effort aims to clarify this truth and invite scholarly dialogue within the Islamic world.

Ta’wil vs. Tafsir

Ta’wil serves as a key to uncovering the inner meanings of divine verses, while tafsir, like a lamp, addresses the apparent meanings. This distinction stems from the layered nature of the Qur’anic text: ta’wil reaches the depth of knowledge, whereas tafsir operates on the surface. Ta’wil, due to its link with inner meaning, requires firmness in knowledge, while tafsir is accessible to all using linguistic and narrational tools.
This highlights the necessity of precise criteria for evaluating ta’wil, as lack of systematic frameworks increases the risk of deviation and misguidance.

Criteria for Valid Ta’wil

Evaluating the correctness of ta’wil is as fundamental as verifying a mathematical equation or a logical syllogism. In mathematics, inverse operations like addition and subtraction validate results; in logic, assessing the form and conditions of reasoning reveals correctness. In ta’wil, which penetrates the inner meanings of verses, objective criteria are essential to prevent deviation. These criteria are rooted in the Qur’an itself and rational principles.
Two fundamental principles serve as the pillars for evaluating ta’wil:

1. Non-contradiction with the apparent meaning of verses: Ta’wil, whether for decisive (muḥkam) or ambiguous (mutashabih) verses, must not negate the apparent meaning. Contradictory ta’wil leads to error.
2. Alignment with decisive verses: Ta’wil of ambiguous verses must refer to decisive ones, which serve as the core reference. Any ta’wil inconsistent with these is invalid.

These two principles, like wings, keep ta’wil on the path of guidance. Decisive verses are like the strong roots of the tree of knowledge, providing a reference for assessing the ta’wil of ambiguous verses, while the apparent verses are the outer layer encompassing the inner meaning, and must not contradict the ta’wil.