The Ruling on One Who Opposes the Apparent Meanings of the Qur’an

Answer (and Allah is the Grantor of success): It has been definitively established that it is obligatory to act upon the apparent meanings of the Qur’an and the known Sunnah. Accordingly, they are like explicit texts in that it is forbidden to oppose them, and they may be relied upon in matters of declaring disbelief, declaring immorality, criticism and validation, loyalty and disavowal. Upon this path proceeded the early and later scholars of this Ummah. They infer particular rulings from general verses: they cut off the hand of the thief, flog the fornicator and the slanderer, kill the apostate, the polytheist, and the rebellious aggressor, and so on—all of that by relying upon general verses.
They also infer the impermissibility of marrying a woman in her waiting period from His saying, Exalted: “And do not resolve upon the bond of marriage until the prescribed term reaches its end.” [Al-Baqarah: 235], and its indication of the intended meaning is from the indication of metaphor.
If it is said: There is a difference between an explicit text (naṣṣ) and an apparent meaning (ẓāhir), in that the apparent meaning allows the possibility of intending something else, unlike the explicit text. Therefore, certainty regarding the intended meaning of the apparent is not possible, and thus certainty regarding the immorality, sinfulness, or disobedience of one who opposes it is not possible—unlike the explicit text.
We say: Mere possibility does not prevent certainty. As evidence for this, the explicit text itself allows interpretation, and there is no disagreement that this possibility does not prevent certainty regarding its meaning. Thus, the explicit text and the apparent meaning are equal in what we have mentioned.
Based on this, it is not permissible to give attention to or rely upon the mere possibility present in either the apparent meaning or the explicit text—except when evidence arises that necessitates doing so. In that case, interpretation of the text or departure from the apparent meaning becomes obligatory.
If it is said: Your statement is a departure from the very nature of the apparent meaning, for knowledge and certainty belong to the nature of the explicit text, not the apparent meaning. Your equating the two contradicts what is well-known among the scholars.
We say: We do not deny that scholars have differentiated between the two, and that the scholars of Uṣūl have designated a specific chapter for each. However, this differentiation and categorization is a technical, terminological one that arose after combining them in what we have mentioned.
We further strengthen our argument by saying: The proof of Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is established by both. This is a matter over which there is no disagreement. Its meaning is that no argument will benefit before Allah, Glorified and Exalted, from one who seeks to justify abandoning action upon the apparent meaning; rather, his argument is invalidated.
Yes, there are rare matters in which illusion may occur for some regarding their inclusion under a general rule, or there may be subtle meanings for some that are more apparent to others, or the like. Such cases are what should be intended by saying that their indication is probabilistic, and that it is not permissible to rely upon them in declaring disbelief, immorality, and so on.
This is because perspectives differ in understanding apparent meanings, and the one who errs is excused, due to His saying, Exalted: “Allah does not burden a soul except according to its capacity.” [Al-Baqarah:286], and His saying: “So fear Allah as much as you are able.” [At-Taghābun:16], and similar verses.
Among what further supports what we have stated is the consensus that the Sharīʿah of Islam is general for every legally accountable person in every time and place.