The opposition of the early Muslims to the interpretation of the Quran

I found the opposition to interpretation in some strict religious circles throughout the period extending from the end of the first century AH to the third century, (perhaps even beyond). The motives and reasons were very different, and thus there is no doubt that pious men like Abu Wael, brother of Salama, had other reasons besides those arising from critical theories of authentic hadith about men such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who rejected interpretation as an acknowledged science, and scholars of language like Al-Asma'i, who also had reasons dictated by their personal stance. However, the movement of resistance against interpretation was primarily carried out by the pious who opposed rationality, similar to what we find worldwide. But Goldtseher addressed this issue from the wrong angle. He was unable to understand piety that fiercely opposed any interpretation of sacred speech, nor did he understand that this trend in piety was opposed to the approach represented by men like Ibn Abbas. In summary, he did not grasp the deep internal opposition present in the authentic early Islam. Everyone agrees that Ibn Abbas himself was not subjected to attack, but there was opposition against his followers and students. At least most of these, despite the opposition of a radical Sunni minority, had fame that prevented their condemnation by later generations. Instead, the image presented of them was somewhat altered under the influence of the later supporters of opposition to interpretation, who misled and confused Goldtseher partly. And this is precisely because the sources of the biography — especially the narrators, Ibn Sa'd, and others — present some biased hadiths from circles opposed to interpretation.