Interpretation Outside Qur’anic Verses

And he raised his parents onto the throne, and all of them prostrated to him. He said: “O my father, this is the interpretation of my previous dream.” In this verse, the term interpretation refers to the realization of the inner meaning of Joseph’s dream, which was previously seen and has now come to pass.

Interpretation Outside Qur’anic Verses

In certain instances, the term interpretation in the Qur’an refers to hadiths, dreams, and various objects. For example, in the story of Khidr and Moses (peace be upon him) in Surah Al-Kahf, interpretation involves explaining the inner meaning of actions that appear incomprehensible. These applications demonstrate that interpretation encompasses a broader concept than solely Qur’anic verses and points to the inner reality of any truth or entity.

For instance, a verse in Surah Al-Kahf refers to the interpretation of Khidr’s actions:

“I will inform you of the interpretation of that over which you could not exercise patience.”

In this case, interpretation refers to the elucidation of the inner meaning of actions that Moses (peace be upon him) could not comprehend at first sight.

Differences in Timing and Occurrence of Interpretation

Interpretation can relate to future events, past occurrences, or reports of incidents. In Joseph’s story, the dream was seen before its occurrence, and its interpretation was realized afterward. In contrast, in Khidr’s story, the action occurs first, and the interpretation is provided subsequently. This diversity illustrates the flexibility of interpretation in referring to the inner reality of events across different temporal contexts.

Key Point: Interpretation refers specifically to the inner reality of a truth, whether in Qur’anic verses or other entities, and may relate to past, future, or reported events.

The Linguistic and Qur’anic Scope of Interpretation

As a reference to the inner reality, interpretation has diverse applications in the Qur’an. From its linguistic root in ‘ʿawwala’ to its usage across various Surahs, interpretation points to a deeper comprehension of meanings and realities. This concept is not limited to Qur’anic exegesis but extends to the essence of objects and events, and it is distinct from ordinary commentary.

Historical Perspectives on Interpretation

Throughout history, four main perspectives on interpretation have emerged:

1. Interpretation and exegesis are identical (early scholars and literalists): This view equates interpretation with exegesis, neglecting the distinction between them. Such an approach leads to intellectual rigidity and a superficial understanding of the Qur’an. For instance, just as “faqir” and “miskeen” may sometimes have the same meaning yet convey nuanced differences when used together, this perspective overlooks subtle distinctions between interpretation and exegesis.
2. Interpretation conveys the opposite meaning of the apparent text (some Sufis): Some Sufi scholars, like Ibn Arabi, understand interpretation as conveying the opposite of the apparent wording. This can result in spiritual distortion and arbitrary readings. For example, criticisms of Moses (peace be upon him) or the absolution of Pharaoh, which contradict the apparent Qur’anic text, stem from this approach.
3. Interpretation as a secondary meaning of the word: Here, exegesis represents the primary meaning, and interpretation refers to secondary or additional meanings. However, this view faces difficulties since a word cannot longitudinally sustain multiple meanings without ambiguity.
4. Interpretation concerning existential truth: This perspective links interpretation to the inner, existential reality of a verse or object rather than to the literal word. This approach aligns more closely with the Qur’anic nature of interpretation and transcends mere linguistic limitations.

Key Point: The fourth perspective, which associates interpretation with existential reality, is more compatible with the Qur’anic essence of this concept and prevents spiritual distortion.

Critique of the Sufi Perspective

The Sufi view, which treats interpretation as the opposite of the apparent meaning, has led to deviations. Attributing meanings inconsistent with the Qur’an, such as criticisms of Moses or absolution of Pharaoh, distances one from the Qur’anic truth and constitutes spiritual distortion. This approach acts like a skewed mirror that reverses the image of reality.

Incorrect interpretation may lead to spiritual distortion. For example, in the verse:

“You are the best nation brought forth for mankind; you enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong.”

If “nation” is interpreted as referring to the Imams, this aligns with the condition of enjoining right and forbidding wrong, as the Imams are the most exemplary of the nation. However, applying it to inappropriate individuals constitutes spiritual distortion resulting from ignoring the boundary between apparent and inner meaning.

Critiquing historical perspectives on interpretation highlights the necessity of precisely defining this concept. The fourth perspective, which links interpretation to existential truth, aligns better with the Qur’anic nature of interpretation and prevents spiritual distortion.

The Role of Tafsir al-Mizan and Its Critique

Tafsir al-Mizan, by Allama Tabatabai, holds a distinguished position in Shi’ite Qur’anic studies and serves as a foundational reference for understanding the Qur’an. Employing a philosophical and mystical methodology, al-Mizan illuminates the path for interpreting the verses, though it does not mark the end of inquiry.

To study Tafsir al-Mizan, consulting the original Arabic text is essential, as Persian translations often lack academic rigor. Arabic, being the original language of the Qur’an and al-Mizan, facilitates more precise comprehension, which is crucial for scholars and researchers.

In the discussion of exegesis and interpretation, the perspective presented here diverges from Tabatabai’s views—not out of disrespect, but to deepen scholarly discourse and open new horizons in Qur’anic understanding. The central issue is whether interpretation pertains to the word itself or to the reality the word signifies.

The perspective offered here associates interpretation with the existential truth of verses rather than merely their wording. Qur’anic verses convey an existential reality, and interpretation points to this inner reality. This view surpasses mere linguistic limitations.

Key Point: Interpretation is a description of the existential truth of verses, not merely of the wording, distinguishing it from Tabatabai’s methodology.

Scholarly Dynamism in Qur’anic Understanding

Religious scholarship must be generative and dynamic, not confined to previous authorities. Scholarly dynamism is essential for advancing Qur’anic comprehension and generating new knowledge. Reliance solely on predecessors equates to halting mid-journey, hindering innovation.

This dynamism is especially crucial when dealing with complex concepts such as interpretation. Religious scholarship should flow like a river toward the sea of knowledge.

Maintaining respect for scholars such as Tabatabai, Hafez, Saadi, Mulla Sadra, and Ibn Sina is essential when engaging in critical scholarship. Such critique must uphold academic ethics and avoid mixing personal bias or partiality.

Key Point: Scholarly dynamism in Qur’anic understanding necessitates respectful critique and the generation of new knowledge alongside maintaining reverence for past authorities.

Summary of the Discussion on Interpretation

The concept of interpretation in the Qur’an, as a tool for uncovering the inner reality of verses and divine truths, occupies a special position. Unlike exegesis, which addresses the apparent meaning of verses, interpretation points to deeper layers of meaning. Examination of linguistic roots, Qur’anic applications, and historical perspectives indicates that interpretation is a specific reference to the essence and inner reality of a truth. Critiquing views that equate interpretation with exegesis or limit it to opposite meanings highlights the necessity of precise definition. The fourth perspective, which connects interpretation to existential reality, is more compatible with Qur’anic principles.

Differing from Tabatabai’s definition of interpretation does not imply negating the value of Tafsir al-Mizan, but aims to deepen academic discussion. Careful study of the Qur’an and credible sources such as al-Mizan in Arabic is essential for accurate understanding. This analysis provides a foundation for future research in the fields of exegesis and interpretation and emphasizes scholarly dynamism in comprehending the Qur’an. Interpretation, like a light, illuminates the darkness of inner reality, guiding the exegete toward the truth.

The study of interpretation in Qur’anic exegesis is akin to exploring a profound and intricate ocean, inviting scholars to investigate the hidden and manifest layers of divine speech. This concept, with its philosophical and mystical complexities, has historically been the subject of deep discourse and diverse viewpoints. Through reliance on verses from Surah Al-Imran and Tabatabai’s Tafsir al-Mizan, this work analyzes and critiques the definition of interpretation from the perspective of this distinguished scholar.