A question was directed to the Shaykh regarding the meaning of ta'wil (figurative interpretation)?

The Shaykh : We hope you will be generous in providing a comprehensive explanation of everything related to the topic of ta'wil (figurative interpretation), and may Allah reward you with good?
Ta'wil (figurative interpretation) has two meanings: a linguistic meaning and a technical meaning. The linguistic meaning is synonymous with tafsir (exegesis); ta'wil is tafsir exactly as it appears in many verses , where ta'wil means: tafsir, yes, meaning: tafsir, and so on. This ta'wil in this sense is linguistic. Ta'wil also has a technical meaning, which is frequently used in the statements of scholars. The technical meaning of ta'wil is taking the meaning of a text, whether from the Qur'an or Hadith, away from its apparent meaning to another meaning indicated by the Arabic style. For example, interpreting a verse by metaphor (majaz) rather than by its literal truth. Interpreting a verse by its literal truth is tafsir in the technical sense, while interpreting a verse by ta'wil, meaning taking the text away from its apparent meaning, is the ta'wil that is technically defined, and this appears to be what is intended by the question.
For example, the verse regarding which the Salaf (the earliest generations) and the Khalaf (the later generations) differed in interpretation: ; what is the meaning of istawa' (rising above the Throne)?
The meaning of istawa' (rising above the Throne) without ta'wil (figurative interpretation) is "He rose above" (istala), and this is the interpretation of the Salaf (the earliest generations), including Abu al-'Aliyah, as narrated by al-Bukhari in his "Sahih." As for the Khalaf (the later generations), they apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to the verse; that is, they take its meaning away from its apparent meaning to another meaning that seems to them. They say, for example: istawa' means: he took control (istawla). This meaning, which involves taking the verse away from its apparent meaning, is ta'wil (figurative interpretation). Examples of this are numerous, such as His saying—Blessed and Exalted is He—: . The interpretation of this verse: , as some of the Salaf (the earliest generations) said, is its recitation; meaning it is an apparent command. . As for its ta'wil (figurative interpretation), meaning taking the text away from its apparent meaning: , meaning: some of the verses of your Lord, or some of the angels of your Lord; this is ta'wil (figurative interpretation). Therefore, ta'wil (figurative interpretation) in the technical sense is providing a meaning for a text, whether it is the Qur'an or the Sunnah, that its apparent text does not indicate, but which is reached through metaphor (majaz), allusion (kinayah), or the like. This type of ta'wil (figurative interpretation) is not prescribed (mashru') according to the scholars of the Salaf (the earliest generations), and it is not permissible to resort to it except when the literal truth becomes impossible; that is, when it becomes impossible and one cannot interpret the text without ta'wil (figurative interpretation). In that case, they resort to ta'wil (figurative interpretation). Hence arose the disagreement between the Salaf (the earliest generations) and the Khalaf (the later generations). The Khalaf (the later generations) expand greatly in applying ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to verses and take them away from their apparent implications merely by rejecting the apparent meaning of the verse. Often, the rejection in their minds is caused by their analogizing the unseen to the seen. If the verse they are applying ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to relates to Allah—Mighty and Majestic—and His attributes, then this is the furthest thing from correctness when the verse is interpreted in a way that diverts the text of the verse from its apparent implication.
So these people, for example: did not leave the verse on its apparent meaning, as is clear, but rather they said: "Some of the verses of your Lord came." Why? They said: Because Allah—Mighty and Majestic—cannot be described as "coming," and they inferred from "coming" that it implies movement, so they said: Allah cannot be described as moving. The meaning of this statement is that these people who apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) looked at the Lord of the worlds as they look at His creation. Just as a human being is described as moving, they said it is necessary that we not describe Allah with what a human being is described with. This movement of the human being is his attribute, so it is not permissible to describe Allah with some attributes that are among the attributes of humans. This is what compelled them to apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to: as an example. And there is no doubt for a person of reason that if he looks at this cause that led them to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), it will become clear to him that it is one of the weakest causes, indeed it is a false cause; because the implication of this cause, and its limitation, is that as long as humans move, it is not permissible to describe Allah as moving, and as long as humans come, it is not permissible to describe Allah as coming. Extending this—which is false without doubt, like the original premise—as long as humans see and look, it is not permissible to describe Allah as seeing and looking!! As long as humans hear, it is not permissible to describe Allah as hearing!! While the texts of the Book and the Sunnah are mutually supporting, continuous, and mass-transmitted in describing Allah—Mighty and Majestic—as Hearing and Seeing. He—Exalted—said to Musa and Harun: . Similarly, our Lord—Blessed and Exalted is He—said: . Is there a necessity to apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to these texts that establish for Allah—Mighty and Majestic—the attributes of hearing and seeing merely because of the verbal sharing between the human and Allah in hearing and seeing? If they had done so, they would have fallen into what the Mu'tazilah (a rationalist theological sect) fell into before them; for the Mu'tazilah (a rationalist theological sect) went to extremes in ta'wil (figurative interpretation) and denied hearing and seeing as well. Meanwhile, the Asha'irah (the Ash'ari theological school), for example, who applied ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to "coming" and attributed "coming" to other than Allah, while Allah—Mighty and Majestic—says: . These people from the Asha'irah (the Ash'ari theological school) who applied ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to this verse did not apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to: . So they did not deny hearing and seeing, but the Mu'tazilah (a rationalist theological sect) went to extremes and denied hearing and seeing.
Now, did they deny the verses that establish these two attributes, the attribute of hearing and the attribute of seeing? The answer is: No, but they denied the realities of their meanings. They said: "Hearing and Seeing" is equivalent to "Knowing." Knowing is one thing, Hearing is another thing, and Seeing is yet another thing. This is what the scholars of the Salaf (the earliest generations) call ta'til (denial of the divine attributes); meaning they nullified the implication of the verse that Allah is Hearing and Seeing through ta'wil (figurative interpretation). They said: The description of Allah—Mighty and Majestic—of Himself as Hearing and Seeing is an allusion to Him being Knowing. Now, what is the necessity that compelled these people to apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to this text in a way that leads to the denial of these two attributes? They said: Because if we say that Allah is truly Hearing, it means we have likened Him to humans who are described as Hearing and Seeing. Allah described Adam. This is the doubt (shubhah) upon which the people who apply ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to verses and take them away from their apparent implication relied.