The role of ʿaql (reason or intellect) in Qur’anic exegesis (tafsīr) is subject to contrasting interpretations between traditional Shīʿī scholars of the Qur’an and critical rationalists. Traditional Shīʿī scholars of the Qur’an – i.e. those who adhere to a classical uṣūlī (rationalist) hermeneutical approach – regard ʿaql as a legitimate source of knowledge like the Qur’an and Sunna and assume it possesses religious authority (ḥujjiyya sharʿiyya). Within their framework, an exegetical method is the use of an authoritative source in exegesis, leading them to assert that reason-based exegesis (tafsīr ʿaqlī) is an important method in Qur’anic interpretation. In contrast, critical rationalists contend that traditional scholars have attributed an unwarranted role to ʿaql by equating it with a source of objective truths. According to critical rationalists, ʿaql encompasses two distinct cognitive faculties: ʿaql as “reason” distinguishes valid arguments from invalid ones, and ʿaql as “intellect” seeks to comprehend reality by developing, formulating, and assessing conjectures. ʿAql functions as a method solely in its capacity as reason, albeit with a function that diverges significantly from the traditional scholars’ interpretation. This paper first introduces, compares, and contrasts the traditional Shīʿī and critical rationalist perspectives concerning the role of ʿaql in Qur’anic exegesis. It subsequently explores the implications of these differences on the typology and study of exegetical methods and approaches.

KEYWORDS: ʿaql, exegesis, traditional Shīʿī, critical rationalist, typology, exegetical methods, exegetical approaches