Advanced
Fiqh
Surah: Al-Maida (6)
Reading Differences in Rulings Verses — Direct Jurisprudential Impact
وَأَرۡجُلَكُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡكَعۡبَيۡنِ
— المائدة الآية 6
The usul al-fiqh principle:
A correct mutawatir reading is treated as an independent verse — each establishes a Sharia ruling and may establish what the other does not.
Direct examples:
Jurists cite all mutawatir readings as evidence — it is impermissible to reject a mutawatir reading on grounds that it contradicts a jurisprudential analogy.
A correct mutawatir reading is treated as an independent verse — each establishes a Sharia ruling and may establish what the other does not.
Direct examples:
- Wudu — Al-Maida (6):
"And your feet to the ankles" — nasb reading (arjulakum, accusative): washing the feet is obligatory. Jar reading (arjulikum, genitive): wiping is permissible — cited by some for wiping on socks. - Making up fasts — Al-Baqara (184):
"And upon those who are able to fast, a ransom" — reading "yutiqunahu" (full capability): ransom for one who was able but broke fast. Reading "yatatawwaqunahu" (straining): ransom for one incapable at all. - Tayammum — Al-Maida (6):
"Wipe your faces and hands from it" — "minhu": some read with tanwin, others with a connecting form — jurists differ on the ruling regarding touching the earth.
Jurists cite all mutawatir readings as evidence — it is impermissible to reject a mutawatir reading on grounds that it contradicts a jurisprudential analogy.
Source: Al-Nashr (2/254); Al-Jassas, Ahkam Al-Quran (2/347); Attr, Ilm Al-Qiraat (p.212)
Test Yourself
How did the two readings "arjulakum" and "arjulikum" affect a well-known jurisprudential question?
Show Answer