I REPLY

Amal Sr.,

Hidden agendas are the cause of the multiple interpretations .

This happens because scholars who make up Sharia boards interpret the law in a manner that best reflects the beliefs of the societies in which they operate.
(Joseph A. DiVanna, “Understanding Islamic Banking – The Value Proposition that Transcends cultures”, Cambridge, UK: Leonardo and Francis Press, 2006, p. 13)

Two more quotes:

Elisabeth Jackson-Moore, “The International Handbook of Islamic Banking and Finance”, Cranbrook, Kent: Global Professional Publishing, 2009, p. 27:
One of the problems today arises from the lack of any widely accepted legal codification based on Islamic jurisprudence.
+
In matters of finance, the essence of Islamic law is perhaps based on a verse from the Qur’an that says “Do not usurp another’s possessions” (2:218)
+
However, because the law is derived from writings that pre-date modern life, interpretations can be difficult. In the finance sector, the early banks called on the most noted scholars of the day for help. But these scholars were academics with no practical finance experience.

C.G. Weeramantry, “Islamic Jurisprudence – An International Perspective”, Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press, 2001, pp. 46-47:
Differences of opinion both as to the handling of the source material and over methods of interpretation led also to the evolution of different schools of jurists. Islam was not unique in this respect.
In all major legal systems there tend to be different schools of thought, especially in regard to legal interpretation.