Abstract
 
Verse 40 of Surah Al-Baqarah, despite its historical appearance, has become the focal point of one of the deepest hermeneutical divergences in the Islamic world. This study, using a qualitative and comparative content analysis method, examines the epistemological foundations of this exegetical discrepancy in interpreting the "covenant" as "guardianship" in the Imami tradition and as "prophethood" in the Sunni tradition. The research findings indicate that this schism is rooted in the conflict between two ultimate sources of authority for understanding the sacred text. The Imami tradition, by relying on the knowledge-giving authority of the exegetical narrative, considers the Hadith of the Infallible as a ruling source that reveals the inner meaning of the Quran, elevating the meaning from the historical level to a fundamental truth (guardianship). This interpretive approach has an intra-discourse function in theological identity-building. In contrast, the Sunni tradition, adhering to the primacy of context and intra-textual evidence, entrusts the ultimate authority to the Quranic text itself, and conditions any understanding on its compatibility with its outward form and historical context. This text-centric approach, which leads to the interpretation of the covenant as prophethood, serves an extra-discourse function in proving the righteousness of Islam against the People of the Book. Ultimately, this article concludes that the existing discrepancy is more a fundamental dispute over methodology and authority in exegesis than a quarrel over the meaning of a single word, reflecting two distinct hermeneutical systems in the history of Islamic thought