Now, if the word “interpretation” applies to the whole Book in the sense we have just explained, every doubt is removed. The matter then resembles His words:

“They ask you about the Hour: ‘When will it be set?’ Say, ‘Its knowledge rests only with my Lord; none will reveal it at its appointed time but Him. It weighs heavily upon the heavens and the earth …’ — until His saying, ‘Indeed, its knowledge is with Allah alone.’” ⦗7:187⦘

And likewise:

“People ask you about the Hour. Say, ‘Its knowledge is with Allah.’ And what can make you know? Perhaps the Hour is near.” ⦗33:63⦘

Here He makes plain that no one possesses knowledge of the Hour except Allah, meaning the knowledge of its precise time and its essential reality. Yet we do know certain of its features because He has informed us of them. Thus, knowing the Qur’an’s interpretation is like knowing the Hour—and the Hour itself belongs to that interpretation. This is perfectly clear.

That the knowledge of the Hour is with Allah does not prevent us from knowing whatever details about its signs and events He has disclosed, nor from explaining the texts that describe them. The two kinds of knowledge simply differ.

Should the pronoun, however, be taken—as many do—to refer to what is ambiguous, this is because the reports concerning reward and punishment are, by their nature, ambiguous, whereas commands and prohibitions are not. Hence the early tradition states: “Act on its definitive passages and believe in its ambiguous ones,” for the purpose of informative verses is belief. What has been reported about promised reward and threatened punishment contains the ambiguity we have just discussed, unlike commands and prohibitions. For that reason some scholars said: “The ambiguous comprises parables, promises, and threats, while the definitive consists of commands and prohibitions.”