The issue of understanding Narrated Attributes such as "yad" and "batsh" is one of the long-standing challenges of Islamic theology, because these expressions apparently convey a physical or emotional meaning about God, and for this reason, theological schools have taken different paths in interpreting them. This is where the necessity of this research stems from. The spread of contemporary doctrinal disputes, especially between Salafi and Imami currents, requires a comparative and critical rereading of these concepts based on the Quran, narration, and reason. This study, using a comparative-critical method and with interpretive, lexical, and narrative analysis, extracts and compares the views of Salafi and Imami hadith commentators. For the adjective "yad", the findings show that Salafi commentators and commentators, relying on the appearance of the text, have considered "yad" to be a true but ambiguous adjective and have avoided any broad interpretation; While Imamiyyah commentators and exegetes with a Tanzih approach have interpreted it as divine power, victory, or mediation. Regarding the adjective “batsh”, Salafiyyah interpret it as an optional verb based on the divine essence, but Imamiyyah consider it a manifestation of divine power and justice within the framework of science and wisdom and avoid any kind of human analogy. The final results show that the Imamiyyah view is more coherent in terms of compatibility with the context of the verses, rational principles, and rules of Tanzih; because it avoids both the closure of attributes and the possibility of analogy or personification. In contrast, although the Salafi view is apparently committed to Tanzih, the emphasis on the verbal proof of attributes without interpretation leaves the field of physical understanding, at least at the level of general perception.