Jurisprudential Differences Between Readings — How Reading Affects Meaning
readings
Level: advanced
differences
rdg-013
وَأَرۡجُلَكُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡكَعۡبَيۡنِ
— المائدة 6
Different readings may imply different jurisprudential rulings:
Example 1 — Al-Maidah 6 (wudu): "Your feet to the ankles" — read with nasb (accusative, joined to washing = washing obligatory) or with jarr (genitive, joined to wiping = wiping valid). Hence scholars' disagreement on washing vs. wiping feet.
Example 2 — Al-Baqarah 222 (menstruation): "When they have cleansed themselves" — light vs. heavy tashdid on ta — implying different levels of purification. Hence scholars' disagreement on timing.
Principle: Ibn Al-Jazari: "Difference in reading is like difference in two verses — each yields a ruling the other does not."
Source: Al-Nashr (1/33); Al-Qurtubi (6/98); Ibn Al-Arabi
Question: How did the two readings of "arjulakum" contribute to jurisprudential disagreement?
Answer: Nasb: joined to what is washed → obligatory washing. Jarr: joined to what is wiped → wiping valid. Hence the scholarly disagreement.