went to great lengths to defend that view, is among those who discuss the meanings of the ambiguous verses most extensively. He advances interpretations of them that have not been transmitted from any of the early generations, and supports his explanations of the Quran by appealing to rare Arabic usages. His purpose is to refute Ibn Qutaybah, yet he is no more knowledgeable about the meanings of the Quran and hadith, no more faithful to the Sunnah, nor more discerning in these matters than Ibn Qutaybah. Although Ibn al-Anbārī had an exceptionally extensive knowledge of Arabic committed to memory, understanding the texts is a different discipline from memorizing the words of the language.

He and others criticized Ibn Qutaybah for challenging some of Abū ʿUbayd’s explanations of unfamiliar expressions in hadith. Ibn Qutaybah, however, explained his reasons for doing so and followed the approach of other scholars like him. He and his peers are sometimes right and sometimes wrong.

If none but Allah knows the meaning of the ambiguous passages, then all these scholars are speaking presumptuously about Allah, discussing something that there is no way to know. But if their explanations of the meanings of the ambiguous passages are correct—even concerning a single word—then their error becomes evident when they say: “None but Allah knows the meaning of the ambiguous passages, and no created being knows it.” Let whoever defends their view choose one of these two alternatives.

It is well known that much of their explanation of the ambiguous passages is correct, while some of it is mistaken. It is therefore known with certainty that their interpretation of this verse is among their errors, for they have correctly interpreted many ambiguous passages. The same applies to the report from Qatādah that those firmly grounded in knowledge do not know the interpretation of the ambiguous passages, for his book