condemn distorting words from their proper contexts, contradicting the Quran and Sunnah, and speaking about the Quran on the basis of personal opinion.

(The precise answer is as follows:

Either His constant nearness in Himself is possible or it is not. If it is possible, the verse requires no reinterpretation. If it is not possible, the verse is understood according to what its context indicates, namely, His nearness through His knowledge. On this view, either this is the apparent meaning of the discourse indicated by the context, or it is not. If it is the apparent meaning, there is nothing to dispute, since no reinterpretation is involved. If it is not the apparent meaning, then the verse is understood in this way only because Allah Most High has explained in several places in His Book that He is upon the Throne and that He is above. Thus, His repeated statements in His Book that He is above the Throne, together with the mention of knowledge accompanying this verse, indicate that He intended nearness through knowledge. For, on this assumption, what those verses entail conflicts with the apparent meaning of this verse, and an explicit statement takes precedence over an apparent meaning and clarifies it.

Muslims agree that one verse may be explained by the apparent meaning of another, and that discourse may be understood in a sense other than its apparent meaning. None of Ahl al-Sunnah considers this objectionable. Even if it is called reinterpretation and a departure from the apparent meaning, it is supported by the Quran and accords with the Sunnah and the early generations, because it is explaining the Quran by the Quran, not explaining it through personal opinion. What is objectionable is only to divert the Quran from its intended meaning without any indication from Allah, His Messenger, or the earliest Muslims, as explained previously. Imam Ahmad—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—has a treatise on this kind of explanation, namely, discussing