—treating the discourse as nothing more than words. This, too, is a mistake, for it is universally acknowledged that the meaning of any utterance varies with the one who speaks it and with the person addressed.

For instance, if an abusive expression reaches you from a person of standing and the very same expression is voiced by a scoundrel, the first wound is sharper, because the word of an honorable man carries weight: if he attributes a flaw to me, he lowers my rank. But when a base fellow who insults everyone reviles me, I care little—even though the wording is identical.

Likewise, if someone says of a small boy, “By Allah, this is but a rujayl”—rujayl being the diminutive of rajul, “man”—the phrase counts as praise; yet to say the same of a mature, intelligent man is to belittle him.

Thus a single word can change according to the addressee; indeed, a diminutive may at times convey something grave and momentous, as the poet said:

“And every folk shall be struck among them
by a calamity that makes the fingertips pale.”

In the same way, some people take the Qur’an and the hadith and interpret them solely by what the outward wording seems to demand, paying no attention to the Speaker, the audience, the recipient of the revelation, or the surrounding circumstances. This is an error.

To sum up: the first group focused on meaning without giving due regard to what the Qur’anic expressions themselves require in terms of indication and clarity, while the second concerned itself with the bare wording alone.