Reading Differences in Rulings Verses — Direct Jurisprudential Impact

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.

The principle:
Jurists cite all mutawatir readings as evidence — it is impermissible to reject a mutawatir reading on grounds that it contradicts a jurisprudential analogy.