"In the fourth century AH (tenth century CE), Qur'anic exegesis (tafsīr) and hermeneutical interpretation (ta'wīl) diverged along two distinct paths within the rationalist Imāmī discourse (the Baghdad school) and the esoteric (bāṭinī) Ismā'īlī discourse (the Fāṭimid Caliphate). The works Ḥaqā'iq al-Ta'wīl by al-Sharīf al-Raḍī and Asās al-Ta'wīl by al-Qāḍī al-Nuʿmān stand as representative exemplars of these two traditions. The central research problem concerns the foundational principles of ta'wīl in each work, the critiques leveled against them, and the extent to which both texts were shaped by the historical-discursive context of their respective eras. Adopting a comparative-analytical approach and employing intertextual analysis while taking into account the historical intellectual climate and discourse, this study systematically compares the exegetical components of the two commentators. The hypothesis posits that al-Sharīf al-Raḍī, by prioritizing the literal sense (ẓāhir) and employing rational reasoning, offers a disciplined and methodical hermeneutics. In contrast, al-Qāḍī al-Nuʿmān, with his predominance of numerical and allegorical esotericism, subordinates the literal wording to the hierarchical (hierocratic) system of Ismā'īlī doctrine. These methodological differences, however, are rooted in the competitive and rationalist milieu of Baghdad on the one hand, and the legitimizing imperative of the Fāṭimid Caliphate in Egypt on the other. The findings of this research indicate that al-Sharīf al-Raḍī's method yields a defensible system that is consistent with linguistic and rational principles, and remains open to critique and further analysis, whereas al-Qāḍī al-Nuʿmān's approach leads to a form of hermeneutical exclusivism vested in the senior authorities of Ismā'īlī hierarchy