Between Text, Science, and Tradition: A Four-Criterion Hermeneutical Model for Quranic Scientific Exegesis (al-Tafsīr al-ʿIlmī)

Scientific exegesis (al-tafsīr al-ʿilmī) has been one of the most intensely debated topics in modern Quranic studies over the past two centuries. Existing scholarship has predominantly focused on the legitimacy or theological permissibility of such readings, largely neglecting how classical exegetical tradition engaged with the relevant verses. Approaching scientific exegesis as a distinct hermeneutical phenomenon, this study proposes a four-criterion methodology to distinguish acceptable interpretations from speculative readings that warrant caution: lexical conformity (lafẓ), contextual consistency (siyāq), epistemic centrality (whether the Quranic text or scientific data serves as the epistemic anchor), and cumulative exegetical heritage (al-turāth al-tafsīrī), which evaluates both the content and interpretive purpose of classical commentaries. This framework is applied through a comparative analysis of eight selected verses—four representing plausible scientific interpretations and four illustrating problematic readings. The findings demonstrate that acceptable interpretations align with both the linguistic framework of the text and the trajectory of classical exegesis, while problematic interpretations typically involve imposing external scientific frameworks onto the text, disregarding contextual cues, or subordinating the Quranic text to scientific data. The study contributes a systematic, tradition-grounded evaluative framework to the field of scientific exegesis.