Is it permissible to definitively assert the reasoning found in books explaining verbal ambiguities, or does this formulation not indicate certitude?

Many scholars have focused on explaining the verbal متشابه (ambiguous/homologous), and some have even authored specific books on the subject. However, the meanings and explanations they provided, which are not supported by a revelation text, are based on ijtihad (independent reasoning), reasoning, and interpretation. These can be considered for guidance but are not definitive, which is why their interpretations and derivations have differed.