عنوان مقاله [English]
Drawing upon a descriptive-analytical method, this paper firstly defines, examines and compares the exegetic approaches of Ibn Taymiyya and Allāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī, and by introducing their exegetic methods, in the next step, explores the consequences of the two exegetic approaches for one of the most important Quranic themes – the distinction between clear and ambiguous verses and the interpretation of each one in their views. In the last step, this paper evaluates these views, and thereby will compare the two exegetic approaches – that one is on the basis of hadiths and the other based on an intellectual method. It seems that the exegetic approach of Ibn Taymiyya on the basis of hadiths is not a reasonable and reliable method to interpret the ambiguous verses of the Qur’an. In contrast, the prior objectivity of intellect in the method of Allāma Ṭabāṭabā’ī distinguishes clear verses from ambiguous ones in a systematic manner, and maintains both canonical principles and intellectual exploration in parallel with interpreting both groups of verses..