Zahir, Nass, Mufassar and Muhkam: Degrees of Textual Clarity

Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.

• What is the basic criterion for the third division?
• Which is the correct order of the manifest classes?
• What does bi-nafs al-samaʿ express in the definition of zahir?
• In what respect is the trade-and-riba verse zahir?
• What if an unsupported alternative meaning is merely conceivable for zahir?
• What distinguishes nass technically?
• Why is the trade-and-riba verse nass?
• How can a statement illustrate both zahir and nass?
• Which possibilities may remain with nass?
• What is the meaning of takhsis in this lesson?
• Which describes taʾwil?
• Who supplies the clarification that characterizes mufassar?
• Which possibilities does mufassar exclude?
• What does kulluhum clarify in the angels’ verse?
• According to the footnote, what does ajmaʿun reinforce?
• When did the source allow the theoretical possibility of naskh for mufassar?
• How does naskh differ from takhsis?
• In what respect is muhkam stronger than mufassar?
• Why is “Allah knows everything” an example of muhkam?
• What does “Allah does not wrong people” illustrate?
• What accompanies action in the stated ruling of muhkam?
• Which conclusion is incorrect?
• Which manifest class corresponds to khafi?
• In which direction does clarity increase?
• Zahir conveys its apparent meaning without elaborate reflection.
• Nass rules out interpretation and specification entirely.
• “The angels all prostrated together” is the textbook’s example of mufassar.
• The possibility of naskh in mufassar authorizes any scholar today to abrogate it.
• The two examples of muhkam concern Allah’s knowledge and freedom from injustice.
• Any emphatic phrase is muhkam even when abrogation remains possible.