Research aims at discovering knowledge, which is the awareness of truth. A reliable procedure enables us to reach knowledge, to progress from darkness to enlightenment. Research expedites understanding. Exegesis endeavours to understand text; jurisprudence endeavours to apply it by deducting the rulings (laws) from the knowledge of revelation. Jurisprudence depends on exegesis. If exegesis is flawed, the results of jurisprudence will be flawed. There is no guarantee, however, that if exegesis is reliable, the results of jurisprudence will also be reliable. Errors could taint even jurisprudence resting on sound exegesis. Exegesis and jurisprudence require the engagement of reason. Without the use of reason, no exegesis or jurisprudence is possible. Among of the greatest errors of traditional exegesis and jurisprudence is that these disciplines were evolved with insufficient recourse to reason. The rejection of reason proved disastrous for both exegesis and jurisprudence. For it rendered exegetes and jurists who refrained from the use of reason handicapped. Exegesis and jurisprudence are derived from revelation. The presuppositions of exegesis and jurisprudence must be in accord with the teaching of revelation. The corruption of the knowledge of revelation brought trauma to the umma. The corruption of knowledge resulted from the repression of reason. The repression of reason enabled the rise of a militant rendition of the knowledge of revelation. Islam was reinvented as an agenda for waging wars of territorial expansion, through recourse to the teaching of abrogation. The teaching of abrogation enabled militant ulema to tamper with the teaching of revelation. By designating jihad al-talab as the sixth pillar of Islam, hawkish ulema did not just render lawful what Allah prohibited; by endorsing wars of aggression to "spread religion by the sword," hawkish ulema triggered a backlash against the umma. For wars of aggression, which require Muslim to become aggressors, triggered retaliation by non-Muslims. The retaliation by the Mongols triggered by the unlawful treatment of the Mongol traders and ambassadors, vanquished the Abbasids. The peaceful co-existence of the umma within the "global village" requires a reassessment of traditional exegesis and jurisprudence, as well as the resultant perceptions of revelation, to bring them into agreement with the Book of Allah. It is necessary to reject militant renditions of Islam and return to the tolerant Islam taught by revelation and practiced by the prophet. The worst aberrations were expressions of textual and juristic shirk. These tainted the tauhidic character of the epistemology of Islam. Accordingly, it is necessary to restore the tauhidic foundation of epistemology. Textual shirk transpired when tradition was treated as a "partner" and even a "part" of revelation. Juristic shirk transpired when persons were permitted to abrogate and replace revealed rulings. Thomas Kuhn argues that knowledge progresses through revolutions, where an existing paradigm is replaced by a better, truer paradigm. This takes place when a person discovers an anomaly in the existing paradigm. Thus, the geocentric perception of the solar system was superseded by the heliocentric perception. Muslim exegesis and jurisprudence are tainted by a few anomalies. They encompass the repression of revelation by tradition, initiated by an enchantment with tradition, assisted by the repression of reason, and propelled by the political aspirations of rulers. The prophet-centric paradigm is problematic, as it is at tension with the chief pillar of Islam, or tauhid. Accordingly, the restoration of the tauhidic perspective requires a shift from the prophet-centric to the Allah-centric paradigm of Islam. The worst aberrations were expressions of scriptural and juristic shirk.