How have groups of scholars cited the Qur'an to support their Research Paper

How have groups of scholars cited the Qur'an to support their different stances on prophetic immunity from sin - Research Paper Example Controversies arise when the revelations of God (the power that is incomprehensible to mind) are interpreted and discussed by the mind-level scholars. This is true of scholars of any religion and Islam is no exception. No scholar can reach the divine heights of prophets and as such common agreement for their different stances is impossibility. The followers of Islam have their inspiration and guidance from twin sources. â€Å"The norms and assumptions that have characterized belief and action in Islam have their initial inspiration in two foundational sources. One is scriptural, embodying the message revealed by God to the Prophet Muhammad and recorded in the Qur’an. The second is the exemplification of that message in the perceived model pattern of the Prophet’s actions, sayings and norms, collectively called the sunna.† (Nanji, n.p.)) For Muslims Qur’an is the ultimate scripture, its revelations are inviolable; it contains direct communication from God. The contents of Qur’an are not debatable; as such there is no question of difference interpretations as for those revelations. Sunna comes next in the order of preference in the sense it contains historical, but divinely inspired contents as guided by â€Å"Prophet Muhammad, whom the Muslims believe that he is the last in the series of messengers from God.†(Nanji, n, p.) He is the final religious authority for the Muslims. â€Å"The late Fazlur Rahman, noted University of Chicago scholar of Islamic thought and modernist Muslim thinker, argued that in its initial phase Islam was moved by a deep rational and moral concern for reforming society and that this moral intentionality was conceived in ways that encouraged a deep commitment to reasoning and rational discourse.†(Nanji, n.p.) Qur’an is the revelation of God and it cannot be compared or estimated with the measuring scale of reasoning. Here is the origin of conflict between the scholars. Because most o f the scholars speak and write from the mind-level and they are not connected to the divine source. When revelations are weighed in the scale of human reason, the results are not going to be divine. Rational understanding and divine understanding are poles apart. Human beings may explain about their connectivity, which is not there in real terms. â€Å"The relationship between the Qur’an and the life of the Prophet, as a model of behavior, was also elaborated to create a legal framework within which values and obligations could be determined.†(Nanji, n.p.) But when the scholars intervene, no two scholars have ever given identical opinions on any contentious issue. Every scholar cites Qur’an but interprets its revelation in the light of the reasoning that one visualizes. Different stances of the scholars regarding prophetic sins need to be understood in this context. Prophetic immunity from sin: Truth needs to be followed implicitly when it has been accepted as t ruth. Truth is complete and there is nothing like partial truth. When the implementing authorities of truth, the Prophets especially chosen for the assignment, there is no question of deviation from the path of truth. They are expected to dutifully deliver truth to humankind. God has chosen them with a purpose and he has the detailed backgrounder information about the ones he has chosen. â€Å"However, Jonah (pbuh), for instance, deliberately abandoned his divinely ordained