Burhān, Language, Taʾwīl, and Epistemic Authority: Interdependent Conditions of Interpretive Legitimacy in Ibn Rushd’s Theory of Qur’anic Interpretation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21111/tsaqafah.v22i2.132Keywords:
Ibn Rushd, Qur’anic interpretation, burhān, ta’wīl, epistemic authorityAbstract
Although Ibn Rushd (Averroes) is widely recognised as one of the most influential Muslim philosophers, contemporary scholarship has generally examined his theory of Qur’anic interpretation through separate themes, including ta’wīl (allegorical interpretation), burhān (demonstrative reasoning), philosophy of language, and interpretive authority. While these studies have significantly enriched understanding of his thought, they have seldom explained how these concepts function together as a coherent epistemological framework governing the legitimacy of Qur’anic interpretation. This article addresses that gap through a qualitative conceptual analysis of Ibn Rushd’s principal works, Faṣl al-Maqāl and Al-Kashf ʿan Manāhij al-Adillah, combined with a critical synthesis of contemporary scholarship. The analysis demonstrates that ta’wīl is governed by demonstrative reasoning, Arabic linguistic convention, and the epistemic classification of scriptural texts, before reconstructing the logical relationships among these elements into a unified analytical framework. The study argues that ta’wīl is not the epistemological foundation of Ibn Rushd’s theory of Qur’anic interpretation but a methodological consequence of demonstrative reasoning and linguistic mediation. It proposes an epistemic model of Qur’anic interpretation in which burhān provides epistemic justification, language mediates semantic meaning, ta’wīl regulates interpretive methodology, and epistemic authority legitimises interpretation through demonstrative competence and ethical responsibility. By integrating concepts previously examined in isolation, the article reconstructs Ibn Rushd’s theory of Qur’anic interpretation as a coherent epistemological architecture rather than a theory centred solely on allegorical interpretation, contributing to contemporary debates in Qur’anic hermeneutics, Islamic philosophy, and the epistemology of religious interpretation.
References
Abu-Zeid, Nasr Hamid, The Discourse of Ibn Rushd Between Knowledge and Constraint’, Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, 16, 1996, 6–35 , https://doi.org/10.2307/521841
Adamson, Peter, ‘Averroes: A Rationalist in Islam (Review)’, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 76.4 (2002), 807–8, https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/bhm.2002.0157.
Al-Jabiri, Muhammad Abid, Nahnu Wa Al-Turāts: Qirā’āt Mu’āshirah Fī Turats Al-Falsafī, 2nd edn (Beirut: Markaz Dirasat Wihdat Arabiyah, 2007)
Alizadeh, R, ‘Reviewing and Criticizing Averroes’s Viewpoint on Granting the People of Reasoning (Ahl Al-Burhān) the Right to Interpret the Quran Esoterically’, Religious Inquiries, 13.1 (2024), 23–40, https://doi.org/10.22034/ri.2024.360400.1643.
Belo, Catarina, ‘Averroes (d. 1198), The Decisive Treatise’, ed. by Khaled El-Rouayheb and Sabine Schmidtke, The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 278–95, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199917389.013.37.
Campanini, Massimo, ‘Qur’an and Science: A Hermeneutical Approach, Journal of Qur’anic Studies, 7.1 (2005), 48–63, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25728164.
———, ‘The Mu‘tazila in Islamic History and Thought’, Religion Compass, 6.1 (2012), 41–50, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8171.2011.00273.x.
Carrasquillo, Francisco J. Romero, ‘Philosophy and the Metaphorical Interpretation of Religious Texts in Averroes, Maimonides, and Aquinas’, The Muslim World, 109.4 (2019), 627–47, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12314.
El-Ehwany, Ahmed Fouad, ‘Ibn Rushd’, in A History of Muslim Philosophy, ed. by Mian Muhamad Sharif (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1963), pp. 540–63
El-Khodeiry, Zeinab Mahmoud, Ātsar Ibn Rushd Fī Falsafah Al-Ushūr Al-Wusthā (Cairo: Dar Al-Tsaqafah li Al-Nashr wa Al-Tauzi’, 1983)
Gracia, Jorge J E, ‘Interpretation and the Law: Averroes’s Contribution to the Hermeneutics of Sacred Texts’, History of Philosophy Quarterly, 14.1 (1997), 139–53, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27744734.
Green, H E, ‘Use of Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks in Qualitative Research’, Nurse Researcher, 21.6 (2014), 34–38, https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.21.6.34.e1252.
Hasan, Ali, ‘Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) on Creation and the Divine Attributes BT - Models of God and Alternative Ultimate Realities’, in Models of God and Alternative Ultimate Realities, ed. by Jeanine Diller and Asa Kasher (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2013), pp. 141–56, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5219-1_13.
Ibn Rushd, Abu Walid, Al-Kashf ‘an Manāhij Al-Adillah Fī ‘Aqā’Id Al-Millah, ed. by Muhamad Abid Al-Jabiri, 1st edn (Beirut: Markaz Dirasat Wihdat Arabiyah, 1998)
———, Faṣl Al-Maqāl Fī Taqrīr Mā Bayna Al-Sharīʿah Wa Al-Ḥikmah Min Al-Ittiṣāl, ed. by Muhamad Abid Al-Jabiri, 1st edn (Beirut: Markaz Dirasat Wihdat Arabiyah, 1998)
Leaman, Oliver, A Brief Introduction to Islamic Philosophy, 1st edn (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999)
Long, A S, A R Mahmood, and M H Ismail, ‘Free Will in Averroes’ Compatibilism’, International Journal of Islamic Thought, 27 (2025), 1–13, https://doi.org/10.24035/ijit.27.2025.313.
Mabrook, Ali, The Evasive Defeat of Rationalism: From Ibn Rushd to Ibn Khaldūn’, Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics, 16, 1996, 89–115, https://doi.org/10.2307/521845.
Okumuş, M, ‘The Influence of Al-Ghazzali on the Hermeneutics of Ibn Rushd’, Islam - Zeitschrift Fur Geschichte Und Kultur Des Islamischen Orients, 86.2 (2011), 286–311, https://doi.org/10.1515/ISLAM.2011.023.
Quinn, Timothy Sean, ‘Descartes’s Revised Averroism’, The Review of Metaphysics, 67.4 (2014), 769–89, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24636441.
Raisuni, Ahmad, ‘Al-Manhā Al-Maqāshidī Fī Fiqh Ibn Rushd’, in Al-Athā Al-Fikrī Li Ibn Rushd: Halaqah Dirāsiyah, ed. by Fathi Malkawi and Azmi Taha, 1st edn (Oman: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1999), pp. 25–47
Sidiropoulou, Chryssi, ‘Qur’anic Interpretation and the Problem of Literalism: Ibn Rushd and the Enlightenment Project in the Islamic World’, Religions, 6.3 (2015), 1082–1106, https://doi.org/10.3390/rel6031082.
Sidiropoulou, Chryssi, and Massimo Campanini, ‘Reviewed Work(s): Averroes, the Decisive Treatise: The Connection Between Islamic Religious Law and Philosophy by Massimo Campanini’, Philosophy East and West, 68.3 (2025), 1–14, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26529875.
Snyder, Hannah, ‘Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines’, Journal of Business Research, 104 (2019), 333–39, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.
Taha, Azmi, ‘Masyru’ Al-Tajdīd Al-Fikrī ’inda Ibn Rushd’, in Al-Athā Al-Fikrī Li Ibn Rushd: Halaqah Dirāsiyah, ed. by Fathi Malkawi and Azmi Taha, 1st edn (Oman: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1999), pp. 167–203
Taylor, Richard C., ‘Averroes: God and the Noble Lie’, in Laudemus Viros Gloriosos: Essay of Armand Maurer, CSB, ed. by Richard Edward Houser (University of Notre Dame Press; Notre Dame, Ind., 2007), pp. 38–59
———, ‘Averroes on the Sharī’ah of the Philosophers’, in The Judeo-Christian-Islamic Heritage: Philosophical & Theological Perspectives, ed. by Richard C. Taylor and Irfan A. Omar (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2012), pp. 283–304, https://epublications.marquette.edu/phil_fac/261,
———, ‘Review of The Medieval Controversy between Philosophy and Orthodoxy. Ijmā and Tawīl in the Conflict between Al-Ghazālī and Ibn Rushd’, ed. by Iysa A Bello and Hans Daiber, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 22.2 (1990), 250–51, http://www.jstor.org/stable/163753.
Wahba, Mourad, ‘Mufāraqah Ibn Rushd’, in Ibn Rushd Mufakkir-an ‘Arabiyy-an Wa Rāid-an Lil Al-Ittijāh Al-‘Aqlī, ed. by Athif Al-Iraqi (Cairo: Majlis Al-A’la li Al-Tsaqafah, 1993), pp. 29–38
———, Mulāk Al-Haqīqah Al-Muthlaqah (Cairo: Maktabah Usrah, 1999)
Wohlman, A, Al-Ghazali, Averroës and the Interpretation of the Qur’an: Common Sense and Philosophy in Islam, Al-Ghazali, Averroës and the Interpretation of the Qur’an: Common Sense and Philosophy in Islam, 1st edn (London: Routledge, 2009), https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203865118.
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Imam Wahyuddin, Agus Himawan Utomo, Arqom Kuswanjono, M. Mukhtasar Syamsuddin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
All articles in this proceeding are open access, the articles published in them are immediately and permanently free to read, download, copy and distribute. Each volume is published under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 user license.
