What is the methodology of the people of the Sunnah and the community in understanding certain verses that may call for figurative interpretation

The questioner : The last question for us, so that we may make room for our brothers. It is known that among the principles of the methodology of the people of the Sunnah and the community regarding the names and attributes is that they pass over the verses and hadiths that came regarding the names of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and His attributes as they came, without figurative interpretation, comparing Allah to creation, denial of the divine attributes, directing, or likening Allah to creation. But some of our brothers ask about certain verses that call for figurative interpretation: such as His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): , or His saying (Mighty and Majestic): , or His saying (Mighty and Majestic): , or other verses that are considered to call for it.

The Shaykh : Figurative interpretation.

The questioner : Some figurative interpretation. So is it permissible to interpret such verses? Or if there are hadiths close to them or with their meaning, to interpret these hadiths that came regarding some of the names and attributes, if there is an indication that calls for it?

The Shaykh : I say, in answer to this question: after praising Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) and relying upon Him alone, who has no partner, if there is figurative interpretation for some of the verses mentioned in the question, it should not come from us, the later generations. Rather, we are followers, as it came in the Salafi wisdom: “Follow and do not elevate yourself, and follow and do not innovate.” We are not innovators, but rather we are followers. Therefore, we said earlier a quick, passing reference, and we have lengthy, repeated words, and praise be to Allah, they are recorded and circulating among people: regarding the necessity of understanding the Book and the Sunnah on the methodology of the righteous predecessors. Lectures were delivered to affirm the necessity of adhering to the understanding of the Book and the Sunnah, not only in what concerns the verses of attributes and hadiths of attributes, but in understanding Islam as a whole, from its beginning to its end. We must understand them—I mean the Book and the Sunnah—as our righteous predecessors did. This is in general, and in the names and attributes in particular, because they were among the most dangerous pitfalls from which people deviated from the methodology of the Book and the Sunnah... except that they did not adhere to this restriction I am now circling around: on the methodology of the righteous predecessors. They followed their own heads and understood the verses and hadiths with a special understanding coming from their own understandings and minds, and they did not receive those concepts and those interpretations from the righteous predecessors, and especially from them: the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who received the Qur'an from the mouth of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) fresh, juicy, and clearly explained. These righteous predecessors are those by whom we should be guided in our understanding of Islam in general, and regarding the subject of verses of attributes and hadiths of attributes secondly. So we say: if there is a verse or hadith that is said to be interpreted, and it is transmitted from our righteous predecessors, then we are followers and not innovators, as we said earlier. What they accepted without interpretation, we are with them. And what they interpreted—I reserve my position, because what is called interpretation is often not the path of interpretation at all—but I say, hypothetically and for the sake of argument, that some of the disputants or innovators or those who oppose the predecessors claim, like some of the verses mentioned earlier, that it is interpretation, like the verse: , . They say: this is interpretation. If it is interpretation and the scholars explained it with this interpreted meaning, and I mean by them the righteous predecessors, then we follow them, because they are more knowledgeable than us about what Allah revealed to the heart of His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), because they received the knowledge from him directly. But in many cases, what is called interpretation is not interpretation, as I mentioned earlier: and this is the example now, and we will not dwell long on it or on others, because the intention is to establish a rule, which is: “If the predecessors interpreted a text, then we are with them. If it is called interpretation, let it be called so, and there is no dispute in names and terminology.” But in many cases it is not interpretation, and this is the example: . “Hands”: here it is not the plural of “hand” which is the limb for us humans, but rather it is: power. The hand is power, and hands are power. So it is not here the plural of hand which may be pluralized to “aydi” and “ayadi,” but rather it is here in the meaning of strength. And the verse concerning Dawud (peace be upon him), I think , yes?
The student : .

The Shaykh : Meaning: the one possessing strength. And it does not mean he has hands like an octopus, and no blame, no, but rather he is the possessor of strength. So this is not interpretation. I take this as an example and suffice with it in answering that question. They say: in the interpretation of the verse in Surat Yusuf (peace be upon him): . This is interpretation, because the meaning is “ask the people of the village and ask the people of the caravan.” They call it interpretation, and it is not interpretation. That is because when they explain interpretation, they say: “It is taking the meaning away from the apparent, from the literal, to the figurative.” This is what they say. And they condition for this interpretation that the literal meaning be impossible, and that it cannot be affirmed, neither by law nor by reason. So that becomes an indication for those who divide speech into literal and figurative, and the figurative is: interpretation. They condition that the literal meaning be impossible. The matter is not in such a verse that the meaning of the apparent literal of the verse is impossible. Interpretation is: “that you understand a meaning from the verse and turn away from it to a non-apparent meaning.” This is interpretation. But here in the verse, the matter is the complete opposite. No one from the people of the language in which the Qur'an was revealed, and they are the Arabs, obviously, no one comes to mind from what our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) related in this noble verse: , meaning: ask its walls, its mountains, its rivers, its trees, and... this is a meaning that the mind never goes to absolutely. What goes directly to the mind? It is this which they call the omitted attribute, meaning the people of the village, the people of the caravan. This is what comes to the mind. So this meaning that comes to the mind is the literal meaning. So this is not interpretation and this is not figurative, because the literal meaning is what comes directly to the mind of the person. But there is a proof in the law or in the reason that prevents him from understanding this meaning, so he is forced to interpret. The matter is not like this here. The meaning that comes to the mind is this which they call figurative, figurative omission: ask the people of the village. This meaning is the literal. And there are examples and many examples. “I walked and the moon” is also figurative, they mention it. “I walked and the moon”: no one understands that he walked and the moon was in his hand, in his hand he is walking and the moon is in its sky and he is walking on the earth. Likewise: . And the examples are many and very many. So the predecessors interpreted this verse: , meaning: with His knowledge. This is not interpretation. This is the literal meaning that the Arabs do not understand except this. And this is what came from the predecessors. So the answer in brief: if there is interpretation that the predecessors affirmed, then it is on the head and the eye. But in most cases there is no interpretation, but what they call interpretation is the literal. And this is what came in the books of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, explained very fully, with no room for anyone to add to it. And perhaps this is sufficient, if Allah wills, in the answer.

The questioner : May Allah bless you.