Averroes: The Decisive Treatise

This treatise seems to say that philosophy is not only allowed by the Law, but demanded by it. However, it concludes by saying, "Thus whoever tampers with them, by making an interpretation not apparent in itself, or [at any rate] more apparent to everyone than they are (and that [greater apparency] is something nonexistent), is rejecting [25] their wisdom and rejecting their intended effects in procuring human happiness (184).

How is one to determine whether an interpretation is "apparent" or not? This treatise seems to believe it has solved the problem of philosophy and religion, but who can judge this matter of "apparent interpretation" when everyone has his or her own perspective?

How does this idea relate to Midrash and the arguments of interpretation?