Ma`rifat Kalami

In a primitive and inaccurate view, it may come to mind that the acceptance of Abandoning the Better is incompatible with the rational reasons of infallibility; Because Abandoning the Better is a preference for something that has no preference and is a mistake. Therefore, its acceptance is incompatible with the rational reasons of infallibility - which rejects any error from the prophets. The three main areas of infallibility are: 1. Infallibility in receiving and communicating revelation; 2. Innocence from sins; 3. Innocence from mistakes in non-religious affairs. The author believes: Accepting and providing reasons for the first two areas definitely does not conflict with accepting Abandoning the Better. The third area of infallibility is of two types: 1. An error that indirectly disrupts the main goal of the prophets in calling and guiding people. 2. An error that does not have such a result. Abandoning the Better is included in the second part. The appearance of the words of the theologians shows: What they mean by "innocence from error" is only immunity from the first type of error, not immunity from the second type of error. So, there is no inconsistency between the innocence of error and the acceptance of Abandoning the Better. This article tries to prove the above claims and answer the problems by using descriptive-analytical method.