This study critically examines Al-Mawardi’s Al-Nukat wa Al-‘Uyun through Surat Al-Mulk, focusing on how he addressed contradictions among exegetical opinions. It begins with Al-Mawardi’s introduction and interpretive method, particularly his way of presenting commentators’ views, before clarifying the concept of interpretive differences, their types, and scholarly positions regarding them. The research then analyzes the instances where Al-Mawardi classified commentators’ statements as contradictory, comparing his judgments with other exegetical works to assess their accuracy. Using a comparative, analytical, and critical approach, the researcher concludes that scholars emphasize distinguishing between differences of diversity and differences of contradiction, so that agreement is not mistakenly treated as disagreement. Al-Mawardi identified six cases of contradiction, but five of these were misclassified, revealing that many of the supposed contradictions are in fact variations of diversity, making his classifications unreliable.