INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5186 www.rsisinternational.org
Analysis of Fakhr Al-Dīn Al-Rāzī’s Exegesis on the Deviation of
Pluralist Interpretations
Muhammad Afif Fansuri1 & Mohd Haidhar Kamarzaman2*
1Master Candidate, Research Centre for Theology and Philosophy, Faculty of Islamic Studies, Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43650, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.
2Senior Lecturer, Research Centre for Theology and Philosophy, Faculty of Islamic Studies, Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43650, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000426
Received: 20 October 2025; Accepted: 28 October 2025; Published: 14 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The phenomenon of pluralist interpretation has become increasingly prominent in contemporary Islamic thought,
particularly through the influence of modern ideologies that advocate religious inclusivism, truth relativism, and
universal salvation. These ideologies reinterpret Qur’anic teachings to promote the notion that all religions are
equally valid paths to God. This study aims to examine the interpretative deviations arising from pluralist
readings of the Qur’an, specifically in relation to the ideology of religious inclusivism as reflected in Surah Āl
‘Imrān (3:19): “Indeed, the religion with Allah is Islam.” It also seeks to analyze the exegetical approach of
Imam Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī in Tafsīr al-Kabīr as a classical and authoritative framework that reaffirms the
exclusivity of Islam and the principle of tawḥīd. This research employs a qualitative methodology, utilizing
textual and content analysis to critically examine the writings of modern Islamic pluralist thinkers who interpret
this verse through the lens of inclusivism. Their views are systematically compared with Imam al-Rāzī’s
exegetical approach to highlight the epistemological and theological differences between modern ideological
interpretations and traditional Islamic hermeneutics. The findings reveal that pluralist interpretations often
detach the verse from its theological and linguistic context, redefining al-Islām as a universal attitude of
submission to God that encompasses all faiths. This approach undermines the Qur’anic affirmation of Islam as
the final and exclusive divine religion. In contrast, Imam al-Rāzī interprets al-Islām in this verse as the specific
revelation brought by Prophet Muhammad, representing the culmination of divine guidance and the abrogation
of previous religious laws. In conclusion, the study emphasizes the necessity of returning to classical exegetical
principles, as exemplified by Imam al-Rāzī, to preserve the integrity of Qur’anic interpretation and protect it
from modern ideological distortions. By reaffirming the exclusivity of Islam as the true religion in the sight of
Allah, this research underscores the enduring relevance of traditional exegesis in addressing contemporary
pluralist and inclusivist readings of the Qur’an.
Keywords: Tafsir, Imam al-Rāzī, Deviation, Pluralism, Inclusivism.
INTRODUCTION
In recent decades, the discourse on religious pluralism has emerged as one of the most influential and contentious
paradigms within contemporary Islamic thought. This intellectual movement, deeply shaped by modern Western
philosophies and globalized ideas of religious inclusivism, promotes the belief that all religions contain partial
truths and ultimately lead to the same divine reality. Based on this assumption, no single religion—including
Islam—can claim absolute truth or superiority over others. Such a worldview, while appearing to promote
tolerance and coexistence, has introduced serious epistemological challenges to the traditional Islamic
understanding of revelation, faith, and salvation.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5187 www.rsisinternational.org
This ideology of inclusivism has found expression in contemporary Qur’anic interpretation, where classical
exegetical methods are often rejected or reinterpreted to conform to pluralistic ideals. Verses that affirm the
exclusivity of Islam—such as “Indeed, the religion with Allah is Islam” (Āl ‘Imrān, 3:19)—are reimagined as
endorsing a universal form of submission to God, applicable to all religious traditions. Pluralist scholars argue
that such verses reflect a broader spirit of divine inclusivity rather than exclusivity, suggesting that Islam
represents not a distinct faith community but a universal attitude of obedience to God. Within this framework,
diversity among religions is celebrated as an expression of divine will, rather than as a test of faith and truth as
traditionally understood.
This pluralist reading, however, often detaches Qur’anic verses from their linguistic, theological, and historical
contexts. By subordinating revelation to modern ideological constructs such as relativism and inclusivism, these
interpretations risk distorting the essence of tawḥīd—the oneness of God and the unity of His message. The
result is an interpretative confusion that undermines the foundational Islamic principle that Islam, as revealed to
the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, is the final and complete manifestation of divine truth.
In contrast, classical scholars such as Imām Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606H) provide a robust intellectual and
methodological framework for understanding the Qur’an. His monumental work, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb (Tafsīr al-
Kabīr), exemplifies an exegetical balance between rational inquiry and fidelity to divine revelation. Al-Rāzī’s
approach integrates linguistic precision, theological reasoning, and philosophical depth, ensuring that
interpretation remains grounded in the naṣ (textual evidence) and asbāb al-nuzūl (occasions of revelation).
Through his analysis of verses such as Āl ‘Imrān 3:19, al-Rāzī affirms that Islam, in its specific and final form,
is the only religion accepted by Allah, and that prior revelations have been superseded by the message of the
Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Accordingly, this study seeks to analyze and evaluate the interpretative deviations committed by contemporary
pluralist scholars—such as Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Farid Esack, Muhammad Asad, and Fazlur Rahman—who
read this verse through the lens of religious inclusivism. By comparing their interpretations with the exegetical
methodology of Imām al-Rāzī, this research aims to reveal the epistemological and theological inconsistencies
of pluralist readings and to demonstrate the enduring relevance of classical tafsīr in preserving the integrity of
Islamic doctrine. Ultimately, the study underscores that a sound understanding of Qur’anic interpretation must
be anchored in the principles of tawḥīd, textual coherence, and the established sciences of tafsīr, rather than in
modern ideological constructs that blur the boundaries of divine truth.
METHODOLOGY
This study employs a qualitative, textual, and analytical methodology designed to examine contemporary
pluralist interpretations of the Qur’an —particularly Āl ‘Imrān (3:19)—through a comparative lens grounded in
the exegetical framework of Imām Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī. The approach integrates classical hermeneutics with
modern critical analysis to reveal methodological and theological deviations within pluralist readings, while
reaffirming the enduring relevance of traditional tafsīr in preserving Islamic doctrinal integrity.
The research is library-based, relying on critical reading, comparison, and interpretation of both primary and
secondary sources. The primary sources consist mainly of classical tafsīr texts, with Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb by Imām
al-Rāzī serving as the central reference. This work was chosen for its methodological balance between naql
(revealed authority) and ʿaql (rational reasoning), as well as its theological rigor in addressing issues of tawḥīd
and revelation. Supporting classical sources such as Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī, Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī, Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr, and
Rūḥ al-Maʿānī are also consulted to provide comparative perspectives and verify interpretative consistency
across the Sunni exegetical tradition.
The secondary sources comprise writings of modern pluralist scholars who reinterpret Islamic revelation through
inclusivist and relativist paradigms, including Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Farid Esack, Muhammad Asad, and Fazlur
Rahman. These figures were selected due to their intellectual influence and explicit engagement with Qur’anic
verses related to religious diversity and salvation. Additional academic works on pluralism, theology, and
Qur’anic hermeneutics are utilized to strengthen the analytical foundation of this study.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5188 www.rsisinternational.org
The analysis proceeds through two main stages. First, textual examination identifies each scholar’s
hermeneutical principles and interpretative assumptions. Second, comparative analysis contrasts these
interpretations with al-Rāzī’s exegetical framework, focusing on key theological concepts such as al-Islām, dīn,
īmān, and tawḥīd. This stage determines the extent to which modern pluralist readings remain faithful to Qur’anic
language, context (asbāb al-nuzūl), and theological consistency.
Data interpretation follows a descriptive, analytical, and evaluative framework—describing the positions of each
scholar, analyzing their epistemological foundations, and evaluating their theological validity. The goal is to
determine whether pluralist readings align with the essential principles of Islamic orthodoxy or diverge from
them due to modern philosophical influences.
In summary, this methodology emphasizes a disciplined comparative analysis rooted in classical tafsīr
methodology. By aligning modern debates with the interpretative rigor of Imām al-Rāzī, the study aims to
demonstrate that a sound understanding of the Qur’an must remain anchored in the principles of tawḥīd, textual
coherence, and the established sciences of tafsīr—rather than in modern ideological constructs that risk
compromising the absoluteness of divine truth.
BIOGRAPHY OF IMAM FAKHR AL-DĪN AL-RĀZĪ
His full name was Muḥammad bin ʿUmar bin al-Ḥusayn bin al-Ḥasan bin ʿAlī al-Qurashī al-Taymī al-Bakrī al-
Ṭībriṣtānī al-Rāzī (al-Subkī, 1993: 81). The nisbah “al-Qurashī” indicates that he was of Arab Quraysh descent,
while the nisbahs “al-Taymī” and “al-Bakrī” confirm his genealogical connection to Abū Bakr al-Ṣiddīq, the
first Caliph of Islam (Ibn Khallikān, 1996: 140). Discussions surrounding the lineage and origins of Imam al-
Rāzī reflect his eminence and stature in the scholarly world, to the extent that his background continued to attract
the attention of scholars and historians throughout the ages.
Imam al-Rāzī was born at the end of the Abbasid Caliphate, on the 25th of Ramadan, 544 AH (corresponding to
1149 CE) in the city of Rayy, a region located in present-day Iran, which at that time was under the rule of the
Khwarazmian and Ghurid dynasties. He was raised in an intellectually nurturing environment. According to Ibn
Khallikān (1996: 252), Imam al-Rāzī received his early education under the guidance and tutelage of his father,
Ḍiyā’ al-Dīn ʿUmar, a highly respected scholar renowned for his contributions to society. In Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb,
Imam al-Rāzī (1999: 96) refers to his father with the honorific titles al-Shaykh, al-Imām, and al-Zāhid, which
signify his father’s esteemed scholarly and spiritual status.
Imam al-Rāzī was a man deeply devoted to knowledge and its pursuit. He dedicated much of his life to learning
with great diligence. In the field of jurisprudence (fiqh), his chain of transmission (isnād) traces back to his
father, and then through notable figures such as Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥusayn bin Masʿūd al-Farrā’ al-Baghawī,
al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn al-Marwazī, and al-Muzanī, ultimately reaching Imam al-Shāfiʿī (Ibn Khallikān, 1996: 252). In
the field of theology (ʿilm al-uṣūl wa al-tawḥīd), his chain of knowledge extends through scholars such as Abū
al-Qāsim Sulaymān bin Nāṣir al-Anṣārī, Imam al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī, and Abū Isḥāq al-Isfarā’īnī, eventually
connecting to Imam Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī (Ibn al-Subkī, 1993: 242).
After the death of his father in 559 AH, Imam al-Rāzī continued his studies under several prominent scholars of
his time in the city of Rayy and its surrounding regions. According to al-Dhahabī (1946: 206), among his main
teachers was Kamāl al-Dīn al-Simnānī, a renowned scholar in the fields of ʿilm al-kalām (theology), fiqh, and
uṣūl al-fiqh. In addition, he studied with Majd al-Dīn al-Jīlī, who had been a student of Imam al-Ghazālī (al-
Dhahabī, 1946: 206). Ibn Qāḍī Shuhbah (1986: 65) also records that the first teacher Imam al-Rāzī studied with
after his father’s death was Muḥammad al-Baghawī, a distinguished scholar in religious sciences and Arabic
language, before later studying with Kamāl al-Dīn al-Simnānī and Majd al-Dīn al-Jīlī.
Imam al-Rāzī not only gained knowledge through direct study with eminent scholars but was also deeply
committed to reading and memorizing the major works of earlier scholars. It is reported that he memorized al-
Shāmil by al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī, al-Mustaṣfā by al-Ghazālī, and al-Muʿtamad by Abū al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī (Fatḥ
Allāh Khalīf, 1976: 13). Imam al-Rāzī passed away on Monday, the 1st of Shawwāl, 606 AH (corresponding to
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5189 www.rsisinternational.org
1209 CE) in the city of Herat. He was buried later that evening on a hill near the village of Mizdakhan, close to
Herat (Ibn Khallikān, 1996: 252).
TAFSĪR AL-KABĪR
The field of Qur’anic exegesis represents one of Imām al-Rāzī’s greatest contributions to the Islamic intellectual
tradition. This is best exemplified in his most celebrated work, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, also known as Tafsīr al-Kabīr,
which is regarded as his magnum opus. The work consists of twelve large volumes, in which Imām al-Rāzī
begins his exegesis with Sūrah al-Fātiḥah in the first volume, followed by Sūrah al-Baqarah and subsequent
chapters in the volumes that follow (Ibn Abī Uṣaybi‘ah 1699: 470).
This tafsīr is not limited to discussions of theology alone; rather, it encompasses profound analyses of Qur’anic
verses that integrate elements of theology, philosophy, logic, science, linguistics, and other disciplines. Al-
Dhahabī (1946: 209) notes that this commentary includes extensive discussions of the natural sciences and other
branches of knowledge that had emerged within Islamic scholarship during his time, such as astronomy (‘ilm al-
falak). Imām al-Rāzī also frequently engages with the views of philosophers, offering critical refutations of their
arguments within this work. Although his theological reasoning often relies on rational and logical
argumentation, it remains firmly consistent with the creed of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamā‘ah (al-Dhahabī 1946:
209).
This tafsīr has attained great renown among scholars due to its distinctive character, setting it apart from other
exegetical works through its breadth and depth of analysis across multiple branches of knowledge (al-Dhahabī
1946: 208). One of its notable features is the systematic examination of the interconnection between one verse
and another, as well as between one chapter and the next. Moreover, the commentary does not limit itself to
identifying a single form of correlation; rather, it often presents multiple layers of connection between verses
and chapters (al-Dhahabī 1946: 209).
INTERPRETATION OF PLURALISM TOWARDS THE QUR’ANIC VERSES
According to the Kamus Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, the definition of pluralism refers to a plural condition, or
a state of society that consists of various races, cultures, religious beliefs, and so forth. Terminologically,
pluralism can be defined as a theory or doctrine that emphasizes that multiple belief systems, ideologies, or
social groups can coexist harmoniously within a single society. Pluralism is not merely about tolerance, but
involves recognition and acceptance of diversity as something legitimate and appropriate. In the context of
religion, pluralism refers to the acknowledgment of religious and belief diversity as well as efforts to live together
in harmony. It is not just tolerance, but acceptance of religious diversity as a social and theological reality.
Religious pluralism places all religions on an equal and parallel footing, denying the existence of absolute truth
in any one particular religion. (Nurhayati Abdullah 2023: 144–145).
Religious pluralism is one of the contemporary ideological movements that poses a significant challenge to the
Islamic concept of tawhid (divine unity). It does not merely advocate for interreligious tolerance, but goes further
by equating the truth of all religions, claiming that they are equally valid paths leading to God.
The Concept of Religious Inclusivism
Religious inclusivism represents an intellectual approach that has increasingly gained attention in modern
theological discourse, particularly within the context of interreligious relations. This perspective views all
religions as equally true, on the basis that each religion offers its own interpretation of an ultimate reality that
cannot be fully comprehended in absolute terms. Such a view directly denies the concept of absolute truth and
the exclusivity of Islam as the only religion accepted by Allah. Allah says in Surah Āl ‘Imrān (Qur’an 3:19):
Indeed, the religion (that is true and acceptable) in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the
Scripture (the Jews and the Christians) did not differ (regarding the religion of Islam and reject it) except after
knowledge had come to them—out of envy and rivalry among themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the signs
of Allah, then indeed, Allah is swift in taking account.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5190 www.rsisinternational.org
Pluralist thinkers interpret this verse as evidence that the religion accepted by God is a form of total submission
(self-surrender) to Him. Their interpretation is based on the original meaning of the term al-Islām, which they
define as an attitude of complete submission and surrender to the divine will—without restricting it exclusively
to any particular formal religious institution or system (Muhammad Asad 1980: 69). This approach aligns with
the method of Biblical Hermeneutics, which emphasizes understanding the original intent and meaning of a text
as it was first revealed. Pluralist scholars adopt a similar hermeneutical framework when interpreting this verse,
seeking to universalize the message of al-Islām beyond the confines of the Islamic faith as traditionally
understood (Nurhayati Abdullah 2023: 92–93).
Etymologically, the term Islam in this verse derives from the root word aslama, which carries the meanings of
submission, surrender, and obedience in action. Based on this linguistic interpretation, pluralist thinkers argue
that the use of the word Islam in the verse does not exclusively refer to the religion brought by Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him). Rather, it refers to a broader and more universal meaning — the act of
submitting oneself to God — which, according to them, may be manifested through various religious traditions
(Muhammad Asad 1980: 69). Therefore, anyone who sincerely submits to God — whether they are Jews,
Christians, or followers of other faiths — can be regarded as a Muslim in the broader, universal sense, as long as
they are in a state of submission to the Divine will (Muhammad Asad 1980: 69).
Pluralist scholars also emphasize that the concept of Islām as a non-institutional phenomenon (a non-reified
Islām) is indeed recognized in the Qur’an. This, they claim, can be seen in two forms of Islām that are not bound
to institutional or formal structures: first, the Islām practiced by previous prophets and their communities; and
second, individual acts of submission to God’s will (Farid Esack 1997: 127). Although the term Islām originally
denoted an exclusive relationship between individuals and a specific community, its usage has, over time,
evolved significantly in meaning and scope (Farid Esack 1997: 127).
Such an interpretation leads to a form of religious inclusivism, an approach that implicitly dilutes the boundaries
between the absolute truth of Islam and the forms of devotion found in other religious traditions. This includes
reinterpreting the Qur’anic expression dīn al-ḥaqq not as “the true religion” in an exclusive sense, but rather as
“devotion to the truth” in the sense of a spiritual relationship with God (Farid Esack 1997: 127). Interpretations
of this nature open the door to various exegetical approaches that equate the truth claims of all religions, thereby
generating ambiguity and confusion concerning the Islamic concept of tawḥīd (divine unity).
From the pluralist perspective, the main issue in contemporary Islamic discourse lies in the tendency to define
islām solely in its institutional and formal sense (reified Islām). Therefore, according to them, it is necessary to
acknowledge the existence of two forms of submission: personal submission within the framework of a particular
religion, and the possibility of sincere submission beyond the boundaries of that religion and its historical context
(Farid Esack 1997: 127). This interpretation clearly reflects the ideology of religious pluralism, which holds that
all religions are valid and acceptable as long as their adherents submit and surrender themselves to God, even if
they differ in form, institution, and theological framework.
In addition, besides Surah Āli ʿImrān (3:19), another verse often cited by pluralists to support their notion of
religious inclusivism is Surah al-Baqarah (2:62). Allah says in Surah al-Baqarah (Qur’an 2:62):
Indeed, those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians—whoever believes in
Allah and the Last Day and does righteous deeds—will have their reward with their Lord. They will have no
fear, nor will they grieve.
This verse is understood by pluralists as evidence that the Qur’an acknowledges religious inclusivism.
Fundamentally, this belief asserts that faith in God is not necessarily confined exclusively to the sharīʿah
revealed through the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Rather, faith remains valid and accepted as long
as an individual fulfills three essential conditions: belief in the One God, belief in the Hereafter, and the
performance of righteous deeds—even if this occurs within a different religious tradition, such as Judaism,
Christianity, or others (Muhammad Asad 1980: 14).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5191 www.rsisinternational.org
From the pluralist perspective, a distinction is drawn between the terms Īmān (faith) and Islām (submission) as
mentioned in the Qur’an. The word Islām is interpreted literally as sincere submission to God, without confining
it exclusively to the prophetic message of Muhammad (peace be upon him) (Muhammad Asad 1980: 14).
Conversely, Īmān is understood to refer specifically to belief in the sharīʿah brought by the Prophet Muhammad
(Muhammad Shahrur 1996: 33–36). Consequently, a conceptual separation arises between a Muslim—one who
submits to God—and a Mu’min—one who specifically follows the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.
This view has led some pluralist scholars to propose a redefinition of the pillars of Islām and Īmān so that they
align more closely with a universal and inclusive framework that accommodates the reality of multiple religions
and diverse paths to faith (Muhammad Shahrur 1996: 33–36). This signifies a movement toward an inclusive
conception of tawḥīd in which God is acknowledged as the Absolute, yet the paths of devotion to Him are not
limited to any single religious tradition.
In addition, pluralist thinkers adopt an approach known as the Double Movement theory, which combines the
historical analysis of revelation with its application in contemporary reality (Fazlur Rahman 1984: 5–11). The
first movement involves a historical analysis of revelation, that is, studying the background and original context
of the verse’s revelation (Asbāb al-Nuzūl). The second movement concerns contemporary application, which
seeks to apply the moral principles embedded in the verses to the realities of modern society.
Through this approach, pluralists argue that many earlier exegetes avoided addressing the true intent of certain
verses—including this one—which, according to them, clearly states that whoever believes in God, the
Hereafter, and performs righteous deeds, regardless of their religious background, will attain salvation and
reward from God (Fazlur Rahman 2009: 114–115). This serves as the foundation for religious pluralism, in
which the concept is used to argue that salvation in the Hereafter is not exclusive to Muslims alone, but also
extends to followers of other religions, so long as they uphold the principle of monotheism, believe in divine
judgment, and perform good deeds (Fazlur Rahman 2009: 114–115).
Within the framework of religious relativism and inclusivism, the doctrine of religious pluralism asserts that all
major world religions share the same metaphysical truth and originate from a single divine source, albeit through
different paths (Hossein Nasr 1989: 87). Therefore, pluralists interpret Qur’anic verses concerning salvation and
the Day of Judgment—such as this verse—through the lens of religious pluralism, emphasizing that genuine
faith in God, belief in the Hereafter, and righteous conduct are far more important than one’s formal religious
identity (Muhammad Asad 1980: 14).
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, in his work The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary, presents the pluralist
perspective on this verse (Hossein Nasr 2015: 147–150).
This verse emphasizes that salvation can be attained by anyone who believes in God and the Hereafter and
performs righteous deeds, regardless of their particular religion, so long as they do so with sincerity.
This interpretation forms the foundation of a broader religious inclusivism, which recognizes and affirms the
fundamental moral and spiritual values shared across different religions. From this perspective, the mercy and
justice of God are understood inclusively—acknowledging that sincere faith and righteous deeds performed by
followers of various religions are also encompassed within the realm of divine mercy, not restricted exclusively
to Muslims (Hossein Nasr 2015: 147–150).
This verse is also frequently cited by pluralist groups within the Liberal Islam Network (Jaringan Islam Liberal,
JIL) in Indonesia. They interpret the verse inclusively, arguing that divine salvation and reward are not limited
to Muslims alone but also extend to adherents of other faiths, provided that they believe in God, the Hereafter,
and perform good deeds (Muhibudin Hasan 2004: 64–66).
According to their view, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are seen as three religions that share a collective
responsibility to uphold the oneness of God (tawḥīd), since all three acknowledge Prophet Abraham as the
foundational father of monotheism. Therefore, these religions are believed to carry the same divine message and
originate from a common root of monotheistic faith (Muhibudin Hasan 2004: 64–66). This interpretation leads
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5192 www.rsisinternational.org
to a form of inclusivism that effectively denies the uniqueness and exclusivity of Islam as the only true religion
accepted by God.
ANALYSIS OF AL-RAZI’S EXEGESIS ON THE DEVIATED INTERPRETATIONS OF
PLURALISM
In facing the increasingly challenging currents of contemporary thought, various groups have interpreted the
Qur’anic verses using approaches that significantly deviate from the scholarly and methodological principles of
tafsir recognized by authoritative scholars. These interpretations are often influenced by modern ideologies such
as pluralism carrying its own agenda in understanding the Divine revelation. Such deviations not only distort the
authenticity of the Qur’an’s meanings but also undermine the faith (ʿaqīdah) and understanding of Muslims
regarding the true teachings of Islam. As a response to this confusion, it is essential to re-evaluate these
interpretations through the lens of authoritative exegetes, particularly Imam Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī.
The Concept of Religious Inclusivism
Surah Āli-‘Imrān verse 19 is among the Qur’anic verses frequently discussed in interreligious theological
debates, particularly concerning the concept of salvation and the status of other religions in the sight of Allah
SWT. Allah says (Qur’an 3:19):
Meaning: “Indeed, the religion (that is true and accepted) in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were
given the Scripture did not differ (concerning the religion of Islam and refused to accept it) except after
knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah,
then indeed, Allah is swift in account.”.
Firstly, the pluralist scholars interpret this verse broadly and inclusively by emphasizing the etymological
meaning of the term al-Islām as submission or total surrender to the will of God, without restricting it exclusively
to the religious system brought by Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. According to this interpretation, anyone who
demonstrates an attitude of submission to God — whether through Judaism, Christianity, or any other religious
tradition — is conceptually considered a Muslim.
They even reject the understanding of Islam as a reified religious institution, proposing instead that the
definitions of the Pillars of Islam and Pillars of Faith be restructured. Meanwhile, the term mu’min (believer) is
defined more specifically as an individual who accepts and believes in the message of Prophet Muhammad and
follows the formal teachings of Islam.
However, according to Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 171–173), from the perspective of Sharī‘ah terminology, Islam
actually encompasses the meaning of Iman (faith). In other words, a person who is called a Muslim is also a
Mu’min (believer), and the religion of Islam itself inherently contains faith as its essence. Imam al-Rāzī supports
this view by referring to the statement of Allah SWT in Surah Āli-‘Imrān (Qur’an 3:85):
Meaning: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted from him, and in the
Hereafter he will be among the losers.”
If Iman (faith) were not regarded as part of Islam, then logically, Iman would also not be accepted by Allah as a
valid religion. However, such an understanding is rejected as it contradicts the fundamental principles of religion.
Therefore, according to Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 171–173), Iman and Islam in the context of the Sharī‘ah are two
terms that refer to the same reality — that is, the true religion accepted by Allah SWT.
According to al-Ṭabarī (2001: 280–281), the meaning of the term al-dīn (religion) in this verse refers to
obedience that is founded upon humility and complete submission to Allah. Similarly, the meaning of al-Islām
in this context denotes absolute surrender to the will of Allah with full devotion, humility, and submissiveness.
The verb aslama conveys the sense of entering into a state of peace (al-silm), meaning a condition in which one
completely submits without objection to Allah’s commands. Hence, the word aslamū means “they have chosen
to submit, surrender, and humble themselves” without any form of resistance or arrogance.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5193 www.rsisinternational.org
Therefore, Allah’s statement — “Indeed, the true religion in the sight of Allah is Islam” — signifies that the
form of obedience accepted by Allah is that which arises from both verbal and heartfelt acknowledgment that
one is truly His servant, wholly submissive to His commands and prohibitions, without pride or defiance toward
Him (al-Ṭabarī 2001: 280–281).
The essence of this obedience must also be free from any element of shirk (associating partners with Allah), that
is, not attributing divinity or servitude to any being besides Him. Furthermore, the Islam referred to in this verse
entails the testimony that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and the sincere affirmation of the truth
of the message brought by Prophet Muhammad from Allah (al-Ṭabarī 2001: 280–281).
This is the religion approved by Allah — the very faith He has prescribed for Himself, conveyed through His
messengers, and manifested in His saints. Thus, only Islam is accepted by Allah as the true way of life, and no
reward or salvation is promised except to those who steadfastly adhere to it.
Secondly, the pluralist group also interprets verse 62 of Surah al-Baqarah as the Qur’an’s recognition of
salvation in the Hereafter for adherents of other religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Sabianism, as long
as they believe in God, the Last Day, and perform righteous deeds. This approach elevates the concepts of faith
and devotion as inclusive and trans-religious, thereby implicitly validating the doctrine of religious pluralism.
Moreover, they link this interpretation with the Double Movement Theory, which emphasizes the historical
analysis of revelation and its application in the modern context, thus positioning the moral values of the verse as
the ultimate criterion of salvation beyond the boundaries of formal religion.
However, this interpretation directly contradicts the exegesis of Imam al-Rāzī, who explains that the verse refers
to the people who lived before the advent of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. According to Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 536),
Ibn ‘Abbās stated that the verse refers to those who believed before the prophethood of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم — that
is, those who believed in Prophet Jesus and dissociated themselves from the falsehoods of the Jews and
Christians, such as Quss ibn Sa‘īdah, Buhairā al-Rāhib, Habīb al-Najjār, Zayd ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl, Waraqah
ibn Nawfal, Salmān al-Fārisī, Abū Dharr al-Ghifārī, and the delegation from Najāshī. Hence, it is as though Allah
SWT is saying: “Indeed, those who believed before the coming of Muhammad, and those who were upon the
false religion of the Jews, and those who were upon the false religion of the Christians — whoever among them
believes, after the advent of Muhammad, in Allah, the Last Day, and in Muhammad, for them shall be their
reward with their Lord.”
According to Ibn ‘Āshūr (1984H: 531), this verse was revealed as an insertion (i‘tirāḍ) placed amidst a series of
verses describing the Children of Israel — particularly regarding the various blessings that Allah had bestowed
upon them, and how they responded to these blessings with disbelief, defiance, and ingratitude. Thus, this verse
appears as a parenthetical interjection within that sequence.
The wisdom behind this insertion is subtle: it serves to demonstrate that all the wrongful attitudes displayed by
the Children of Israel toward Allah’s blessings had led to their humiliation, poverty, and the perpetual wrath of
Allah upon them. However, at the same time, because the heavy rebukes and warnings of punishment mentioned
in the preceding verses could have instilled fear in their hearts and prompted them to seek deliverance from
Allah’s wrath, the All-Merciful Lord did not leave them without hope. Therefore, this verse was revealed to
clarify that the path of repentance and return to Allah remains ever open (Ibn ‘Āshūr 1984H: 531). It is not a
difficult path to tread; rather, it is a simple one — by sincerely returning to faith in Allah and performing
righteous deeds. Through this, they would attain forgiveness and a good reward from their Lord.
Furthermore, at the beginning of this surah, Allah Almighty describes the hypocrites, followed by a detailed
discussion of the condition of the Jews. Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 536) cites the view of Sufyān al-Thawrī, who
interprets the divine words, “Indeed, those who believe”, as referring to those who profess faith outwardly with
their tongues but do not truly believe in their hearts — namely, the hypocrites. Thus, after mentioning the
hypocrites, Allah then follows by mentioning the Jews, Christians, and Ṣābi’īn. It is as if the intended meaning
of Allah’s statement in this sequence is: “All of these misguided groups — if there are among them those who
come with true faith, then they will be accepted as genuine believers in the sight of Allah.”
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5194 www.rsisinternational.org
Meanwhile, according to the theologians (mutakallimīn), the phrase “Indeed, those who believe” specifically
refers to those who have sincerely believed in the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), indicating their
state in the past (al-Rāzī 1420H: 536). The subsequent phrase, “and whoever believes in Allah”, refers to the
future — namely, those who will continue to have faith and remain steadfast upon true belief (al-Rāzī 1420H:
536). Hence, the overall meaning of this verse is that those who truly believed in the past and persist in their
faith until the end of their lives are the ones promised reward by Allah — without fear and without grief (al-Rāzī
1420H: 536).
According to Ibn ‘Āshūr (1984H: 531), one of the subtleties and eloquent aspects of Qur’anic rhetoric manifested
in this verse lies in the way Allah pairs the mention of the Jews with earlier righteous nations — whether from
among themselves or other communities. This serves to reduce the psychological burden and sadness resulting
from the harsh reproaches directed at them earlier. It also represents a form of justice toward the righteous among
the Jews, an acknowledgment of their virtues, and a message of glad tidings for those who were truly obedient
to their prophets before the advent of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Among such individuals were
those who lived before the time of Prophet Jesus and followed their prophets faithfully, such as the Ḥawāriyyūn
(disciples of Jesus), as well as those who lived during the time of the Qur’an’s revelation, like ‘Abd Allāh ibn
Salām — a Jewish rabbi who embraced Islam — and Ṣuhayb al-Rūmī, a companion of Roman origin (Ibn ‘Āshūr
1984H: 531). Thus, this verse grants due recognition to these groups through encouragement (targhīb) and glad
tidings (tabshīr), while maintaining balance by mentioning warnings (tarhīb) in the preceding verses.
Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 537) concludes that all four groups mentioned in the verse — the believers, the Jews, the
Christians, and the Ṣābi’īn — if they truly believe in Allah, are entitled to divine reward and blessings in the
Hereafter. This conclusion reflects a fundamental principle in religion: that all groups previously in error, if they
abandon their falsehood and return to the truth through sincere faith in the true religion, will have their faith and
obedience accepted by Allah Almighty without rejection. Indeed, Allah does not prevent anyone from drawing
near to Him, so long as they are sincere in their faith and submissive to the truth.
In addition, Imam al-Rāzī (1420H: 537) further explains that belief in Allah is not limited merely to
acknowledging His existence, but rather encompasses faith in all that He has made obligatory — including belief
in the messengers whom He has sent. Likewise, belief in the Hereafter includes all matters related to the life
after death, such as the reckoning of deeds, rewards, punishments, Paradise, and Hell. Hence, the two main
expressions in this verse — “belief in Allah” and “belief in the Last Day” — in reality, encompass all aspects
related to the religion of Islam, both in terms of worldly duties and responsibilities during the period of moral
accountability (taklīf), as well as in relation to the recompense that awaits in the Hereafter (al-Rāzī 1420H: 536).
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this study has critically examined the phenomenon of interpretative deviation in contemporary
Qur’anic discourse, particularly the pluralist and inclusivist readings of Surah Āl ‘Imrān (3:19), “Indeed, the
religion with Allah is Islam.” The analysis demonstrates that the pluralist tendency to interpret this verse as an
affirmation of the equal validity of all religions represents a significant departure from the established principles
of classical tafsīr. Such interpretations, grounded in modern ideologies of inclusivism and relativism, attempt to
universalize the meaning of al-Islām as a generic submission to God applicable to all faiths, thereby diluting the
Qur’an’s explicit assertion of Islam as the final and exclusive revelation accepted by Allah.
Through a comparative analysis with the exegetical framework of Imam Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, this study reveals
that the pluralist approach suffers from a fundamental epistemological flaw—its subordination of divine
revelation to modern humanist constructs. By divorcing the Qur’an from its theological, linguistic, and historical
contexts, pluralist interpretations prioritize human reason and sociocultural ideals over divine guidance. In
contrast, Imam al-Rāzī’s exposition in Tafsīr al-Kabīr situates the verse firmly within the framework of tawḥīd,
revelation, and the finality of prophethood. He interprets al-Islām not as a universal disposition but as the specific
religious system revealed to Prophet Muhammad, which supersedes all prior revelations and embodies the
culmination of divine truth.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5195 www.rsisinternational.org
The findings of this research affirm that the epistemological soundness of Qur’anic interpretation lies in
maintaining a balance between rational reflection and submissive adherence to revelation. Imam al-Rāzī’s
methodology exemplifies this balance, integrating intellectual rigor with theological fidelity. His tafsīr thus
serves as a powerful corrective to modern ideological distortions that seek to reinterpret divine truth through
relativistic and inclusivist paradigms.
Ultimately, this study underscores that the preservation of Qur’anic integrity requires a conscious return to
classical exegetical methodologies that uphold the supremacy of revelation over human speculation. Imam al-
Rāzī’s interpretative framework stands as both an intellectual and spiritual safeguard against the erosion of
Islamic orthodoxy in the face of contemporary pluralist thought. Reviving and applying his principles of tafsīr
is therefore not merely an academic pursuit but a religious obligation—ensuring that the Qur’an continues to be
understood within the immutable framework of tawḥīd, sharīʿah, and ultimate divine truth.
REFERENCES
Al-Quran.
1. Abdillah, M. B. (2016). Pemikiran Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī tentang al-Ism al-A‘ẓam bagi Allah SWT. Jurnal
Usuluddin, 43, 1–40.
2. Abou El Fadl, K. (2005). The great theft: Wrestling Islam from the extremists. New York: HarperCollins.
3. Al-Bājūrī, I. (1419H). Tuhfat al-Murīd ‘alā Jawharat al-Tawḥīd (A. Jumu‘ah, Ed.). Qāhirah: Dār al-
Salām.
4. Al-Bannā, J. (2008). Tafnīd da‘wā ḥadd al-riddah. Qāhirah: Dār al-Shurūq.
5. Al-Bukhārī, M. ibn Ismā‘īl. (1993). Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Dimashq: Dār Ibn Kathīr.
6. Al-Ghazālī, M. (1438H). Al-Iqtiṣād fī al-I‘tiqād. Qāhirah: Saqīfat al-Ṣafā al-‘Ilmiyyah.
7. Al-Qaraḍāwī, Y. (2005). Fuṣūl fī al-‘Aqīdah bayn al-Salaf wa al-Khalaf. Qāhirah: Maktab Wahbah.
8. Al-Qazwīnī, A. ibn Fāris. (1979). Mu‘jam maqāyīs al-lughah. Beirut: Dār al-Fikr.
9. Al-Qurṭubī, M. ibn A. al-Anṣārī. (2006). Al-Jāmi‘ li-aḥkām al-Qur’ān (24 jilid). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-
‘Ilmiyyah.
10. Al-Rāzī, F. al-D. M. ibn ‘Umar. (1357H). Tafsīr al-Kabīr. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
11. Al-Rāzī, F. al-D. M. ibn ‘Umar. (1401H). Tafsīr al-Fakhr al-Rāzī. Beirut: Dār al-Fikr.
12. Al-Rāzī, F. al-D. M. ibn ‘Umar. (1420H). Tafsīr al-Fakhr al-Rāzī al-mushtahir bi al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr aw
Mafātīḥ al-ghayb. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-‘Arabī.
13. Al-Rāzī, F. al-D. M. ibn ‘Umar. (2009). Al-Arba‘īn fī uṣūl al-dīn. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
14. Al-Rāzī, F. al-D. M. ibn ‘Umar. (2011). Ta’sīs al-taqdīs. Beirut: Dār Nūr al-Ṣabāḥ.
15. Al-Zarqānī, M. ‘A. (1409H/1988M). Manāhil al-‘irfān fī ‘ulūm al-Qur’ān (Jil. 2). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub
al-‘Ilmiyyah.
16. Al-Zarkashī, B. al-D. M. (1957). Al-Burhān fī ‘ulūm al-Qur’ān. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Kutub al-
‘Arabiyyah.
17. Al-Zuḥaylī, W. (1986). Uṣūl al-fiqh al-islāmī. Dimashq: Dār al-Fikr.
18. Al-Zuḥaylī, W. (1988). Uṣūl al-fiqh al-islāmī. Dimashq: Dār al-Fikr.
19. Al-Zuḥaylī, W. (1989). Al-fiqh al-islāmī wa adillatuh. Dimashq: Dār al-Fikr.
20. Al-Ālūsī, S. al-D. M. ibn ‘Abd Allāh. (1994). Rūḥ al-ma‘ānī fī tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘aẓīm wa al-sab‘ al-
mathānī. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-‘Arabī.
21. Arif Munandar, W. S. (2021). On the authorship of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s Al-Khalq wa al-Ba‘th. Afkar,
23(2), 171–223.
22. Beta Firmansyah. (2019). Aplikasi teori double movement Fazlur Rahman terhadap hukum memilih
pemimpin non-Muslim. Ushuluna: Jurnal Ilmu Ushuluddin, 5(1), 47–59.
23. Cahyadi, D. (2011). Takdir dalam pandangan Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī. Jakarta: Universitas Islam Negeri
Syarif Hidayatullah.
24. Esack, F. (1997). Qur’an, liberation & pluralism. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.
25. Fathullah Khalīf. (1976). Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī. Iskandariah: Dār al-Jāmi‘āt al-Miṣriyyah.
26. Freeden, M. (2015). Liberalism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Hamdan Hidayat. (2020). Sejarah perkembangan tafsir al-Qur’an. Al-Munir, 2(1), 29–76.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5196 www.rsisinternational.org
28. Hick, J. (2004). An interpretation of religion: Human responses to the transcendent. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
29. Ibn ‘Āshūr, M. al-Ṭ. (1984). Al-Taḥrīr wa al-tanwīr (30 jilid). Tunis: al-Dār al-Tūnisiyyah li al-Nashr.
30. Ibn Kathīr, I. ibn ‘Umar. (1999). Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘aẓīm (4 jilid). Beirut: Dār al-Fikr.
31. Ibrahim, H. (2014). Dari kepelbagaian agama kepada pluralisme agama: Sejarah perkembangan.
Gombak: Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia.
32. John Harelson, C. R. (1987). Biblical exegesis: A beginner’s handbook. Atlanta: John Knox Press.
33. Khalif Muammar. (2018). Islam dan liberalisme: Antara maṣlaḥah dan mafsadah. Afkar, 20(2), 1–52.
34. Locke, J. (1924). An essay concerning human understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. Mazlan Ibrahim, & Faiz Hadi Sanadi. (2024). Liberal Muslim interpretation of Islamic sharī‘a: An
analysis. Akademika, 94(1), 14–25
36. Mill, J. S. (1864). On liberty. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts & Green.
37. Muh. Salam, & Andi Abdul Hamzah. (2022). Tafsir kebebasan beragama dalam Surah al-Baqarah ayat
62: Suatu analisis kritis terhadap Tafsir al-Manar. Tafsere, 10(1), 62–77.
38. Muhammad Hazim, S. M. H. (2018). Keseimbangan al-Ashā‘irah dalam pentafsiran ayat al-jabr dan ayat
al-ikhtiyār. Afkar, 20(1), 285–310.
39. Muhammad Nurman Syafruddin. (2021). Menakar nilai kritis Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī dalam tafsir Mafātīḥ
al-ghayb. Takengon: IAIN Takengon.
40. Nasr, H. (1989). Knowledge and the sacred. New York: State University of New York Press.
41. Nasr, H. (2015). The study Quran: A new translation and commentary. New York: HarperCollins.
42. Norasimah Haji Omar, & Mazlan Ibrahim. (2019). Penilaian para ulama Islam terhadap metode tafsiran
aliran Salafiyyah kontemporari ke atas ayat sifat. International Journal of Islamic Thought, 16(9), 98–
107.
43. Nur Zahidah Che Mohamed, M. N. Ahmad, & N. S. Mohd. (2023). Perkembangan ilmu tafsir merentas
zaman. Turath Journal of Al-Quran and Al-Sunnah, 8(1), 45–60.
44. Nur Zainatul Nadra, & Latifah Abdul Majid. (2012). Sejarah perkembangan tafsir pada zaman Rasulullah
SAW, Sahabat dan Tabi‘in. Journal of Techno Social, 4(2), 43–54.
45. Sjamsoeri Joesoef. (2005). Kitab Tafsir Mafātīḥ al-ghayb (studi pemikiran al-Rāzī tentang nasakh al-
Qur’an). Yogyakarta: Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga.
46. Schuon, F. (1984). The transcendent unity of religions. Illinois: Theosophical Publishing House.
47. Taufik, Z. (2021). Perennialism and the religious common platform of mystical tradition in Java.
Teosofia: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Mysticism, 10(2), 193–208.
48. Ulil Azmi. (2022). Studi kitab Tafsir Mafātīḥ al-ghayb karya al-Rāzī. Jurnal Studi Alquran dan Tafsir
Basha’ir, 2(2), 119–127.