The response [to this is as follows]. The word mutashabih (ambiguous, multiva‌ lent) is clear in meaning, and there is no [characteristic of] summation or ambiguity about it. The word means that a word or an expression bears two or more-meanings and that all these meanings are equally applicable to it. Thus; if the word is used, it would be possible that any of these meanings is intended. One should therefore sus‌ pend judgment until an indication points to the correct meaning. Accordingly, an expression that carries a literal sense cannot be regarded as mutashabih, that is, alle‌ gorical or ambiguous.
If we concede that the word mutashabih is itself ambiguous, and may have a literal meaning, this would not be a cause for preventing a person from acting upon its apparent sense, especially when the established custom among the wise persons is to follow the apparent meanings of the words. For the possibility of its being nothing more than that is not an impediment for acting upon it on the basis of the established custom. To forbid that, it is necessary to establish absolute evidence to the contrary; otherwise, it must, without doubt, be followed. It is for this reason that the Master (God) can remonstrate with His servant if the latter disobeys the ostensible sense of His words, and it is appropriate for Him to punish His servant for his disobedience. In the same vein, the servant himself can protest against his Master if he heeds the literal sense of his Masters words, when this literal sense happens to be contrary to His purpose. In short, this established custom is to be followed in adhering to the literal meanings until absolute proof is established to prevent it.

٦. Occurrence ofTal:trif (alteration) in the Quran.The occurrence of alteration (cor‌ ruption of the text) in the Quran is an impediment to act upon its apparent sense, because of the possibility of these literal meanings being connected to a context that would have conveyed its actual intention, but which has been deleted because of the alteration.
The response [to this is as follows]. The occurrence of ta/:lrifin the Quran has been disproved, as demonstrated by our discussion earlier in this book. There, we mentioned that the traditions that order the believers to refer to the Quran are, in themselves, the proof regarding the absence of ta/:lrif. If we were to relinquish this view, the corollary would be that the traditions impose the obligation to act in accor‌ dance with the Quran even with the likelihood of alterations having occurred. The conclusion of what has been said so far is that it is necessary to act upon the osten‌ sible meanings of the Quran, and it is the foundation of the Sharia, and one cannot act•in accordance with the narrated traditions if they contradict the Quran.

NOTES

١. The reference here is to the phrase "and rub your faces," which occurs in the verses that regulate the ablution for the prayer (verses ٤:٤٣ and ٥:٦).-Trans.
٢. This view is with regard to a man who divorces his wife three times. (This could be done through the expedience of pronouncing the divorce phrase three times.) He may not marry her again except if she had, in the meantime, married and divorced another man. Hence the practice of arranging for the woman to marry a slave, who would later be made to divorce