At other times, however, the meaning they affirm is actually correct, so their mistake lies only in the proof, not in the conclusion. What has taken place in Qur’anic exegesis on this score has likewise occurred in the interpretation of hadith.
Those who have erred both in the evidence and in the meaning include groups of innovators who adopted doctrines that contradict the truth upheld by the balanced community—the ummah whose forebears and leading Imams never come together upon misguidance. Such people approached the Qur’an and bent it to fit their opinions: sometimes they invoke verses to support their school when the verses offer no support at all, and at other times they reinterpret passages that disagree with their school, twisting the words from their proper context.
Commentary
The difference between the two cases is this: on one occasion they cite verses that in fact provide no proof for their view, and on another they distort words whose apparent meaning conflicts with their view. Take, for example, the muʿaṭṭilah (those who deny the divine attributes). They say that the verse laysa kamithlihi shayʾun (There is nothing like Him) proves we may not affirm for God any attribute that could belong to a creature, yet the verse does not bear the meaning they claim. At other times they distort the wording, maintaining that “hand” means power or favor. Although they acknowledge the term, they corrupt its sense: sometimes they load the word with a meaning it cannot sustain, and sometimes they divert it entirely from its true import.
A contemporary instance of the same tendency is found among those who speak of the Qur’an’s “scientific inimitability.” At times they impose upon the Qur’an meanings it will not bear. Admittedly, some of their inferences are sound, demonstrating that the Qur’an is truth and from Allah, and these findings can assist in inviting non-Muslims to Islam—especially those who rely on empirical proofs to verify the Messenger’s message. Yet they also burden the Qur’an with interpretations it cannot sustain, as when they claim that the divine words