In this line of research, it is important to discuss the concept of al-Dakhil as a tool for analyzing a comparative study of the two books of interpretation. In the world of interpretation, the concept of Al-Dakhil has begun to be widely discussed by Muslim scholars as a benchmark for the validity of an interpretation. The linguistic meaning of al-Dakhil is “damaged inside” or “afflicted by damage and containing defects.” Meanwhile, the technical meaning is a flaw or defect that is deliberately covered up or concealed and inserted into several forms of authentic Qur’anic exegesis [3].

Al-Dakhil's study is a critical study in examining an interpretation, due to two factors. First, external factors such as non-Islamic beliefs (Jewish, Christian, etc.) that are inserted into the interpretation with the aim of undermining faith. Second, internal factors, namely interpretations that deviate from the rules of interpretation and are far from the decisions of the majority of scholars. These interpretations are usually caused by Islamic extremist groups but have objectives that differ from the essence of Islam itself (Ahmadiyya, ISIS, etc.)[16].

Al-Dakhil is divided into two categories: al-Dakhilfi al-Ma’tsur and al-Dakhil fi al-Ra’yi. Al-Dakhilfi al-Ma’tsur refers to deviant elements through false hadith narrations, Isra’iliyyat narrations, and narrations attributed to the Companions or Tabi’in through deception. As for al-Dakhil fi al-Ra’yi, it is a deviant element through wrong thinking, such as the use of language that does not comply with agreed rules, erroneous and despicable opinions, whether intentional or unintentional [16].

The concept of al-Dakhil in this study will be analyzed in three steps: (1) Compiling interpretations of the verses on Imamah, (2) Analyzing interpretive patterns through the selection of hadith narratives as the basis for interpretation, (3) Identifying elements of al-Dakhil through semantic and contextual readings influenced by ideology. Through the conceptual framework of al-Dakhil, this study will attempt to reveal the extent to which the ideologies of the interpreters influence their respective interpretive mechanisms.

Before delving into the interpretation of Imamah in the Qur’an, it is important to understand the concept of Imamah that appears in Shi’a doctrine. In Shi’ite theology, the leadership of the Imam is viewed as a legitimate divine authority and the foundation of doctrine, on par with belief in prophethood. Thus, the doctrine of Imamah is not merely a political issue, but a central pillar in the structure of Shi’ite theology [17].

The title used by the Shi’a sect for the successor to the Prophet is Imam, not Caliph. This doctrine is quite important in the emergence of the Shi’a sect itself, because the Shi’a consider that the position of head of state is not the right of every Muslim or anyone else. They believe that this position is the exclusive right of Ali bin Ab Thalib and his descendants, as determined in the will of the Prophet Muhammad SAW[18].

A number of traditions in Islam, particularly among Sufis and Shi’ites, view religious guidance in this world as being channeled through human figures who receive divine guidance. This pattern places prophets and imams as authoritative intermediaries in understanding and practicing religious teachings [17]. The Shi’a believe that the decision to appoint someone as imam must involve a person who has qualities superior to others, and cannot simply be left to the people or ordinary citizens [19].

The Shia consider Imamah to be a position given by God, similar to Nubuwwah. Therefore, Shia followers give titles to Ali and his descendants such as Imam al-Mahdi, al-Washi, and so on. A person’s faith is not complete if they do not believe in Imamah as a religious doctrine. As in the context of Isma’ili Shi’ism in South Asia, the strengthening of prophetic and imamate doctrines took place not only through scholarly works, but also through the preservation of local language oral literary traditions. These traditions served as an effective means of transmitting theology across generations. Popular religious traditions and oral literature have proven to play an important role in spreading Islamic theological ideas within society. This shows that the transmission of doctrine does not only occur through formal tafsir texts, but also through broader cultural mediums [17].

However, within Shi’ism itself, there are several opinions regarding this belief. There are sects that consider those who do not believe in Imamah to be infidels, while others consider them to be wicked. Therefore, within the Shi’a school of thought itself, there are several sects that demonstrate the differences in Shi’a teachings, including the Zaidiyyah Shi’a and the Itsna ‘Asyariyah Shi’a. According to Zaidiyyah Shi’ism, the establishment of an imam is obligatory for the community, according to the general view based on Shari’a law, not rational law. However, in the case of the first three imams, Ali, Hasan, and Husain, they say that their ‘imamate’ was established (nas}) by the Prophet. This establishment is vague (khafiy) and can only be understood through deep reasoning. Therefore, they excuse the sins of the first Muslim community for denying the Prophet’s command [11].

Meanwhile, according to the Imamiyah Itsna ‘Asyariyah Shi'a, the position of Imam is in the hands of their twelve Imams, starting from Ali bin Abi Talib and ending with the twelfth Imam, Muhammad bin Hasan, who is known as al-Mahdy. To support this doctrine of imamate, they created other teachings to complement it, including: al-‘Is}mah, al-Mahdi and al-Raj’ah as well as al-Taqiyyah[12].

According to Umit Toru in his research, “Imamite exegetes tend to interpret eschatological verses through the framework of imamate theology, whereas Sunnite scholars generally avoid such doctrinal associations.” In practice, Imamiyah exegetes tend to read certain verses through the framework of Imamah theology, while Sunni exegetes generally avoid associating these verses with the doctrines of a particular school of thought [2].

Both the Zaidiyyah and Imamiyyah Shi’ites, as well as other Shi’ite sects, believe that only their version of the Ahl al-Bayt are entitled to the title of imam, and they will not recognize anyone outside of this group [20]. One of the foundations used in this regard is the tathir verse (QS. Al-Ahzab: 33), in its contextual interpretation, refers to the infallibility and virtue of Ahl al-Bayt, which has a causal and mutually supportive relationship with other verses that underline the themes of Imamah and Wilayah, thus showing that the themes of leadership and the specificity of Ahl al-Bayt are integrated into a broad network of Qur’anic interpretation [21].

From the above explanation, we can understand that compared to the Imamiyyah Shi’a sect, the Zaidiyyah Shi’a are more moderate in their thinking by not directly declaring those who do not believe in this belief to be infidels, as long as they do not hate and oppose the Imams. They also view imamate as an open right for all descendants of Fatimah without exception, with certain conditions, and consider the caliphates of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman to be valid [11]. Halawi notes that in the history of the formation of the Imamiyyah school of thought, there was a dynamic integration of several traditional methodological principles, including the adoption of aspects such as ijma’ from the Sunni tradition and the use of personal opinion (ra’y) and analogy (qiyas), which shows that the formation of this school of thought did not only occur internally but also through dialogue and cross-adoption of ideas[22].

However, according to Halawi in his academic study of Islamic legal history, the formation of the Imami school has not been studied extensively by historians compared to the Sunni school of fiqh, although some important advances have emerged recently through the exploration of various historiographical approaches and different theories in explaining the evolution of this school[22].

In the study of historical interpretation, the concept of Imamah did not arise in a vacuum, but developed alongside political conflicts following the death of the Prophet Muhammad. The discourse on religious leadership then underwent sacralization through interpretation, especially when general verses were drawn into the theological legitimacy framework of certain schools of thought. This process shows that exegesis not only serves as an explanation of meaning, but also as a medium for the construction of religious authority [23].

Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Shawkani was one of the great scholars from Yemen who was widely known in the fields of tafseer, hadith, fiqh, and usul fiqh. He was born in 1173 AH (1759 AD) in the village of Hijrah Shawkan, Shan’an province, Yemen, into a family of the Zaidiyyah school of thought. From an early age, he devoted himself to religious studies and mastered various branches of Islamic knowledge through prominent teachers, including those from the Zaidiyyah school of thought. However, as his intellectual development progressed, al-Shawkani shifted from Zaidiyah sectarian fanaticism to a more independent and rational approach, adopting the principle of free ijtihad[24].

Al-Shawkani later became known as a scholar who rejected taqlid and called for the opening of the door to ijtihad. In his capacity as Qadi al-Qudah (chief judge) in Yemen, he played an important role in the reform of Islamic law and rejected many extreme sectarian views. In the field of tafseer, al-Shawkani wrote a monumental work entitled Fath al-Qadir, which is evidence of his precision and depth of analysis of the verses of the Qur’an. This work combines the methods of tafseer bi al-riwayat and bi al-ra’yi, with strict selection of the hadiths used and criticism of weak narrations or those from non-credible sources such as Isra’iliyat[25].

In this interpretation, al-Shawkani avoids excessive use of bathiniyah interpretation and presents a moderate view based on the principles of nash and common sense. Fath al-Qadir also shows al-Shawkani’s tendency to combine classical and rationalist approaches in understanding the Qur’an, without neglecting the importance of sanad and matan in the validation of narrations[25].

Al-Shawkani was known as a mufassir from Yemen, who grew up in the Zaidiyyah school of thought. In the 12^th century AH, Yemen was the center of influence for the Zaidiyyah school of thought, which was quite dominant in the scientific and governmental structures. Under such circumstances, it is natural that al-Shawkani’s early education was directly influenced by Zaidiyyah doctrine. However, in his intellectual development, al-Shawkani was influenced by the thoughts of independent scholars such as Ibn Hazm from the Zahiri school and Ibn Taymiyyah from the Hanbali-Salafi school, which encouraged him to break free from the shackles of sectarian blind imitation and develop an approach of absolute ijtihad in understanding Islamic texts [25].

As his knowledge developed, he showed independence and a critical view of various schools of thought. In various works, including Fath al-Qadir, he tended to take a moderate position and was not bound to any particular school of thought. In Fath al-Qadir, he frequently cited various accounts without showing fanaticism towards any particular school of thought. However, in several verses, there is the use of narrations that are classified as weak in terms of their chain of transmission or do not have strong support from the perspective of narration, which can be categorized as al-dakhil. Nevertheless, al-Shawkani shows an effort to criticize some of these narrations by mentioning the weaknesses in their chain of transmission or rejecting their extreme interpretations[25].

Al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan al-Thabrisi was one of the great exegetes of the Imamiyah Shi’ites who lived in the 6^th century AH/12^th century AD. He was born in the region of Khurasan and grew up in a strong scholarly environment, where he studied Islamic sciences such as Arabic, fiqh, and tafseer from prominent scholars, including students of Shaykh al-Tusi[8]. He was known as an intelligent, prolific, and influential scholar in the Imamiyah school of thought, and had a number of important works in various fields.

His most famous tafsir work is Majma’ al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, a comprehensive tafsir that is highly regarded among both Shi’ites and Sunnis. This tafseer is systematically organized, with a multidisciplinary approach. Each discussion of a verse is divided into five main aspects: qira’ah, language (lughah), i’rab (nahwu), interpretation of meaning, and faidah or lessons from the verse. This structure makes Majma’ al-Bayan a profound, scientific, and organized exegesis, and demonstrates al-Thabrisi’s great attention to the validity of language and the historical context of revelation [26].

Although al-Thabrisi emphasized a rational and linguistic approach, he remained committed to core Shi’ite doctrines such as Imamah and the infallibility of the Ahl al-Bayt. This is evident in a number of interpretations of verses that are explicitly linked to the position of the Ahl al-Bayt, although not to an excessive degree (ghuluw). This work also displays a tolerant tone in presenting differences in sectarian views, making it a bridge between sectarian schools of thought[27]. The Majma’ al-Bayan exegesis shows that a more moderate and dirayah-based approach to exegesis has developed within the Imamiyah tradition, marking a shift away from the more ideological approach based on tradition [28].

وَاِذِ ابْتَلٰٓى اِبْرٰهيمَ رَبُّه بِكَلِمٰتٍ فَاَتَمَّهُنَّ ۗ قَالَ اِنِّيْ جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ اِمَامًا ۗ قَالَ وَمِنْ ذُرِّيَّتِيْ ۗ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِى الظّٰلِمِيْنَ

“And (remember) when Ibrahim was tested by his Lord with certain commands, and he fulfilled them. He (Allah) said, “Indeed, I will make you a leader for all mankind.” He (Ibrahim) said, “And (also) from my descendants?” Allah said, “(Yes, but) My covenant does not apply to the wrongdoers.”

The above verse is the first verse that indicates the meaning of Imamah in Shi’ite tafsir literature. In the book Fath al-Qadir, al-Shawkani explains several accounts that interpret this verse by quoting Ibn Jarir’s opinion that Allah’s promise does not apply to unjust imams, but here it also contains a notification from Allah to Ibrahim as., that among his children and grandchildren there will be people who will wrong themselves. For some scholars, interpreting this verse as evidence that an imam must be just and practice Shari’a law, and if he deviates, then he is unjust [25].

This verse contains a message commanding people not to entrust matters of Shari’a to the unjust. In this case, al-Shawkani sees imamah as something broad and does not discuss imamah in Shi’ism in detail. The word imam in this verse is interpreted linguistically as ‘followed’, while in terms of terminology it refers to a person who travels in search of guidance/signs with it. It is also mentioned that the Imam is a role model for humans, because humans ask for advice and follow him. Al-Shawkani also gives a broad view that the word imam is also a term for other than this[25].

The next phrase, ‘wa min dzurriyyati’, could be Prophet Ibrahim’s prayer for his descendants (and may You make my descendants Imam). In addition, it could also be a question, even though it is not in the form of a question, so Allah gives news that among them there are those who are disobedient and unjust, so they are not worthy of being Imam and they will not get what Allah SWT has promised. As for the phrase ‘ahdy, some interpret it as Imamah, prophethood, and others interpret it as salvation from the torment of the hereafter. Based on the order of the sentences, the first meaning is stronger [25].

As for al-Thabrisi’s interpretation, before examining this verse, he first explains the qira’at side, namely in the words Ibrahim and ‘ahdy, which have various qira’at, followed by a discussion of hujjah, the meaning of mufradat and i’rab. After all that, al-Thabrisi then explains the meaning of the verse. His interpretation of the point of Imamah in this verse is by presenting several accounts from Shi’a figures, among them an account from Abu Ja’far bin Babawayh about Hadithmarfu’ through the channel of al-Mufadal bin Umar, from al-Shadiq using the phrase ‘fa atammahunna’, namely the twelve Imamah, nine of whom are descendants of Husain. The next phrase, ‘ahdy, is interpreted as Imamah, which means that an oppressive person cannot be a leader, and is evidence of the necessity of infallibility for the Imams[8].

اِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّٰهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ وَالَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوا الَّذِيْنَ يُقِيْمُوْنَ الصَّلٰوةَ وَيُؤْتُوْنَ الزَّكٰوةَ وَهُمْ رٰكِعُوْنَ ࣖ

وَمَنْ يَّتَوَلَّ اللّٰهَ وَرَسُوْلَهُ وَالَّذِيْنَ اٰمَنُوْا فَاِنَّ حِزْبَ اللّٰهِ هُمُ الْغٰلِبُوْنَ ࣖ

“Indeed, your protector is Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed—those who establish prayer and give zakat while they are bowing [in worship]. And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as their allies, then indeed, the party of Allah is the victorious. “Verily, your helpers are only Allah, His Messenger, and the believers, who perform prayer and pay zakat, while bowing (to Allah). And whoever takes Allah, His Messenger, and the believers as helpers, then indeed, the followers (of the religion) of Allah are the victorious.”

The next argument that is also used as the basis for the doctrine of Imamah by the Shi’ah is QS. al-Ma’idah: 55-56. Al-Shawkani [25]first explains the munasabah of this verse with the previous verse by saying: “Indeed, Allah SWT explains about people who are not suitable to be leaders, then Allah SWT explains who is suitable to be a leader.”

So, this verse is still related to the previous verse which explains that Jews and Christians are not suitable to be leaders for Muslims. The above verse explains who is suitable to be a leader and helper for Muslims. They are Allah SWT, Rasulullah SAW, and those who believe and establish prayer and pay zakat. Meanwhile, the words ruku’ and sujud are interpreted by Al-Shawkani as khusyu’ (submission) and khudhu’ (humility). So, it means people who establish prayer and pay zakat while being humble, not arrogant to the poor and not feeling superior to them. Al-Shawkani rejected interpreting the word ruku’as bowing in prayer on the grounds that it is not permissible to give zakat while bowing [25].

It appears that al-Shawkani is more inclined to interpret the word ruku’ in its figurative sense, i.e., humbling oneself, rather than its lexical meaning. The reason for the revelation of this verse was narrated by Ibn Mardawaih from Ibn Abbas, who said: ‘Abdullah bin Ubay converted to Islam. When tensions arose between the Muslims and the Banu Qainuqa’, he said: “Indeed, there is a treaty between me and the Banu Quraydah and the Banu Nazir. And I fear that disaster will befall me.” Then he left Islam. Then Ubadah bin Samit said, “I surrender to Allah SWT from the agreement with the Banu Quraydah and Nazir, and I surrender my leadership to Allah SWT and the Messenger of Allah SAW.” Then the verse was revealed[25].

In addition, al-Shawkani also mentions another narration, which tells of Ali giving alms with a ring while he was bowing. Then the Messenger of Allah SWT asked the beggar: Who gave you this ring? He replied: The man who was bowing. So, Allah revealed this verse [25]. QS. Al-Ma’idah: 55 shows that al-Shawkani still quotes the narration about Ali giving the ring, but he does not establish this verse as regional nash. On the contrary, al-Thabrisi uses it as the basis for the wilayah of imamah. According to al-Shawkani, the narration mentioning Ali giving the ring while bowing comes from a dha’īfhadith and does not have a strong sanad; even though it is mentioned, al-Shawkani does not stipulate that this verse is specific to Ali or wilayah, but rather leaves room for ijtihad[25].

Meanwhile, in Majma’ al-Bayan, al-Thabrisi also presents the same narration regarding the asbab al-nuzul of the verse about Ali giving charity while in ruku’. However, al-T{abrisi adds the assertion that this verse is clear evidence of the validity of Ali and his descendants as Imams. Al-Thabrisi interprets the word ‘walī’ here to mean “the one who has the right to lead” or “the most important,” and he identifies it exclusively as Imam Ali[25]. The word ‘waliyyukum’ refers to Ali, who manages governmental affairs, and all people must obey him [8].

All the accounts added in this interpretation clearly refer to the Shi’ite mufassir who indicated Ali’s imamate. This interpretation is reinforced by narrated a hadith that Ali gave a ring while bowing, as if that was the moment this verse was revealed as confirmation of his spiritual authority. Al-Thabrisi asserts that this hadith is authentic according to the Imamiyah tradition, and that is why Ali has a special position as a spiritual leader [8].

يٰٓاَيُّهَا الرَّسُوْلُ بَلِّغْ مَآ اُنْزِلَ اِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَّبِّكَ ۗوَاِنْ لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِسٰلَتَه ۗ وَاللّٰهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ النَّاسِۗ اِنَّ اللّٰهَ لَا يَهْدِى الْقَوْمَ الْكٰفِرِيْنَ

“O Messenger! Convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord. If you do not do so, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelievers.”

This verse is one of the next arguments that became the Shia’s reference in the doctrine of Imamah. Al-Shawkani interpreted this verse as an indication that the Prophet Muhammad was obliged to convey everything that Allah had revealed to him and was not allowed to hide anything. This is proof that the Prophet Muhammad never conveyed revelations secretly to anyone [25].

To strengthen his argument, al-Shawkani conveyed a narration found in the book Sahihayn from Aisha RA. She said: “Whoever thinks that Muhammad has hidden something from the revelation, then he has lied”[29]. In Sahih al-Bukhari , there is a narration from Wahab bin Abdullah al-Sawa’i who asked Ali bin Abi Talib: “Do you have any revelation that is not in the Qur’an?” Ali replied: “No, by the One who split the seed and created the soul, except for the understanding that Allah has given to a man in the Qur’an and what is in this sheet” [30].

Al-Shawkani also presented many accounts of events to reinforce that this verse was addressed to the Messenger of Allah, who was obliged to convey the message from Allah, and he had done so in front of the entire community at that time. However, in addition to that, similar to other Shi’a interpretations of this verse, al-Shawkani also mentions that the above verse is implicitly related to the leadership of Ali bin Abi Talib. This can be seen from the narration he quoted from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri and Ibn Mas’ud. Moreover, in al-Thabrisi’s interpretation in Fath al-Qadir, he mentions several narrations and marfu' hadiths attributed to Hayyan bin Ali al-Alawy, that the Prophet held Ali’s hand after this verse was revealed, saying, “Whoever wants a leader, then Ali is his leader. O Allah, help those who help Ali, and promise victory to those who follow him.” In addition, there are many other marfu’ hadiths related to this matter [8]. The reading of QS. al-Ma’idah: 67 as a political declaration shows a shift in the function of revelation from prophetic communication to the legitimization of power [31].

Thabrisi in Majma’ al-Bayan appears as an exegete who strongly affirms the identity of the Imamiyah school of thought. His exegesis tends to use narrations from the Ahl al-Bayt lineage, and often ignores narrations that do not support the theological position of the Shi’a [8].

The sacralization of leadership in the Shi’a tradition has direct implications for how the text of the Qur’an is read. Verses that were originally ethical and universal in nature tend to have their meanings narrowed to align with the doctrine of Imamah. This is where al-dakhil works subtly, not through falsification of the text, but through the selection of meanings and narratives [32]. This study confirms that interpretive neutrality is not determined by the identity of the mufassir’s school of thought, but rather by methodological consistency and a critical attitude toward sources [33].

The existence of al-dakhil as a science that traces ideological doctrines in interpretation is an important reference in accurately reading the meaning of verses. As al-Zamakhsyari did in his interpretation, with his Mu’tazilah ideological background. In terms of Imamah, the Mu’tazilah are almost the same as the Shi’a. However, al-Zamakhshari’s interpretation can be read as a form of intellectual resistance to sectarian interpretation, because he places the verses attributed to 'Ali in a broader horizon of meaning and does not allow them to be reduced to a tool for legitimizing a particular school of thought[34].

The interpretation of verses used as the basis for the doctrine of Imamah in the tafsir Fath al-Qadir by al-Shawkani and Majma’ al-Bayan by al-Ṭabrisī shows very different methodological and theological approaches. These differences reflect the ideological and sectarian backgrounds of each mufassir, and reveal the presence of al-dakhil elements, namely the inclusion of external elements such as theological views, weak hadiths, and the adjustment of meanings to suit the interests of the mazhab.

Fath al-Qadir shows that a mufassir with a Zaidiyyah Shi’a background is not always bound by the doctrines of his school of thought. Al-Shawkani actually demonstrates a conscious effort to free his interpretation from ideological interests, especially on sensitive issues such as political leadership [35]. Conversely, Majma’ al-Bayan shows how interpretation can be a means of articulating sectarian identity. Al-T{abrisī’s attachment to the Imamiyah tradition is reflected in his consistency in linking certain verses to figures of Ahl al-Bayt[36]. This difference shows that the element of al-dakhil is not always present in the form of false accounts, but also in the repeated and systematic emphasis of meaning, thereby creating a normative impression [37].

As a supporting argument, Alwajeeh notes that the founder of Zaidiyyah Shi’ism, Yahya bin al-Husayn, tended to closely associate the doctrine of Imamah with nubuwwah (prophethood) and accepted the ideas of al-Raj’ah and al-Wilayah as proof of the legitimacy of the leadership of Ahl al-Bayt, a position that is theologically more in line with the views of Twelver Shi’ism than Zayd’s own position. This is evidence that the dogma of Imamah is positioned differently in various traditions (albeit within the Shi’a itself), and this is relevant to show the element of al-dakhil that emerges when theological traditions strengthen [38].

In QS. al-Baqarah: 124, al-Ṭabrisī interprets that the position of Imamah is a divine gift that is only given to those who are infallible. He understands that the descendants of Prophet Ibrahim who become imams cannot be unjust, and this is used as an argument that only the Imams from the descendants of Husain bin ‘Ali are worthy of holding the Imamah. This interpretation reflects the Shi’ite doctrine of ‘ishmah and the inheritance of leadership, which is theological and sectarian in nature [8].

In contrast, al-Shawkani in Fath al-Qadir interprets the verse as a form of appreciation for Ibrahim for his success in the test. He asserts that the verse shows the importance of justice in leadership, but does not contain a theological determination regarding the Imamah of a particular lineage. According to him, the prohibition against the unjust is a general principle and not an argument for the concept of Imamah in the Shi’a understanding[25].

The interpretation of Imamah in QS. Al-Baqarah: 124 shows how the concept of leadership can be drawn from the ethical realm to the metaphysical realm. When justice is interpreted as perfection, then the verse is no longer universally normative [39].

QS. al-Ma’idah: 55–56 is interpreted by al-Ṭabrisī as textual evidence for the wilāyah of ‘Alī bin Abi Talib. He refers to the narration that ‘Ali gave his ring to the poor while bowing in prayer, and considers this verse as qath’ī evidence that ‘Ali was the guardian of the believers after the Prophet Muhammad [8]. This may indicates the operation of al-dakhil elements as in the writings of Azzubaidi and Yusoff, who argue that the term wali that appears in QS al-Ma’idah: 55 should not be understood as referring to a specific figure as a spiritual leader or doctrinal authority after the Prophet Muhammad. Such an approach is considered a forced interpretation that is not supported by the linguistic or contextual context of the verse [40]. A linguistic approach to the term ‘wali’ shows that leadership is not the only possible meaning. Ignoring the broader semantic context opens the door to ideological interpretations [41]. In addition, the tendency to associate a historical event with a particular verse also shows how interpretation functions as retrospective legitimation [42].

Meanwhile, al-Shawkani mentions the same narration but does not consider it as definitive proof of ‘Ali’s leadership. He understands the word ruku’ in a metaphorical sense as a form of humility or obedience. With this approach, al-Shawkani avoids specifying the meaning of the verse to only one individual, and keeps the interpretation neutral and non-sectarian [25].

QS. al-Ma’idah: 67 is interpreted by al-Ṭabrisī as a revelation directly related to the events of Ghadir Khumm, where the Prophet is said to have announced the appointment of ‘Ali as Imam after him. This interpretation reinforces the Shi’a doctrinal position on Ali’s divinely appointed leadership [8].

In contrast, al-Shawkani did not interpret this verse as a specific appointment of Ali. He interpreted it as a general command to the Prophet to convey all revelations without fear. Although he mentioned the existence of a narration related to Ghadir Khumm, al-Shawkani did not make it the main basis for his interpretation of this verse [25].

In terms of methodology, al-Ṭabrisī uses a systematic approach to interpretation, which includes qira’ah, nahwu, language, tafseer, and faidah. In QS. al-Baqarah: 124, he begins with variations in recitation (qira’at) and then develops the argument for Imamah based on linguistic analysis and accounts from Shi’a figures, which are strong indications of the existence of the element al-dakhil[8]. In contrast, al-Shawkani uses a tafsir bi al-ma’thur approach combined with careful ijtihad. He prioritizes hadiths that are strong in terms of sanad and avoids interpretations based on disputed accounts, especially those from sectarian literature[25]. Thus, the element of al-dakhil in the interpretation of Imamah is not always explicit, but often works through the repeated and systematic reinforcement of certain meanings [43].

From this comparison, it can be concluded that Majma’ al-Bayan has a tendency toward Shiite theological doctrine originating from a belief in the concept of ‘ishmah and divine appointment of the Imams. On the other hand, Fath al-Qadir presents a more neutral and moderate style of interpretation following agreed-upon rules of interpretation, and avoids external elements that cannot be verified in terms of sanad or maqashid al-Qur’an. These findings indicate that al-Shawkani's Zaidiyyah Shi'ite background did not always influence his interpretation due to his interpretive methodology, which prioritized the strength of the chain of transmission.

Based on Table 1 above, it can be generally observed that the interpretation of Imāmah-related verses in Fath al-Qadīr and Majma‘ al-Bayān reflects two distinct theological and methodological orientations. While Fath al-Qadīr presents a relatively neutral and non-sectarian approach, interpreting Imāmah primarily as a moral and leadership mandate without linking it to infallibility or hereditary succession, Majma‘ al-Bayān consistently frames these verses within a Shi‘a theological framework that affirms the exclusive leadership of the Ahl al-Bayt.

The table also demonstrates differences in the use of narrations and interpretive methods. Fath al-Qadīr tends to be selective in employing hadith reports and maintains a critical stance toward weak narrations, combining transmitted interpretation (bi al-ma’thur) with reasoned analysis. In contrast, Majma‘ al-Bayān frequently utilizes Shi‘a-specific narrations and theological reasoning to support doctrinal positions such as wilayah and ‘ishmah. the comparison highlights that the divergence between the two tafsirs is not merely exegetical but deeply theological, influencing how key Qur’anic verses are understood, contextualized, and doctrinally applied.