its parts confirming one another, there would be nothing objectionable in following that. Nor does its parts confirming one another preclude seeking its interpretation. His expression “ambiguous passages” might be cited in support of this view: He describes the passages themselves as ambiguous, which implies that they resemble one another, not something else.

The answer is that when an expression occurs in two places with two different meanings, it becomes ambiguous. Examples include His words “Indeed, We” and “We,” mentioned in the account of the occasion of this verse’s revelation. When discussing the account of the people of Najrān and the revelation of the verse, Muhammad ibn Ishāq related from Muhammad ibn Ja‘far ibn al-Zubayr:

“The clear passages admit only one interpretation, while the ambiguous passages admit several interpretations.”

This means that the clear wording can refer to only one thing in external reality. Ambiguous wording, however, admits several interpretations, although Allah intends only one of them, and the context of the verse indicates the intended meaning. Thus, those firmly grounded in knowledge know what is intended by the ambiguous passages just as they know what is intended by the clear passages. Yet the interpretation itself—in the sense of the actual reality, the timing of events, and the like—is something they do not know from either kind of passage.

It has also been said that the Christians of Najrān cited His words “a word from Allah” and “a spirit from Him” as evidence. The expression “the word of Allah” may refer to speech or to what is created through speech. Likewise, “from” in “a spirit from Him” may indicate origin or a partitive relationship. On this understanding, when it is said that “none knows its interpretation except Allah,” what is meant is the actual reality: that is, they do not know how He created