have originated from the Prophet. It is evident that such knowledge should make us aware of contradictions among these transmissions, so that each of them would be a repudiation of the other. Consequently, all of them forfeit their claim to authorita‌ tiveness. To ascribe greater validity to some of them would entail giving them pre‌ ponderance without [having them] rest on a preponderant [argument]. It is therefore necessary to fall back on the probabilities arising from these contradictions. Without this method, it is not permissible to formulate legal decisions on the basis of any of these readings.
This conclusion is to be inferred even if we concede that the readings were trans‌
mitted from the Prophet without interruption. Thus, if it can be said that any two different readings were transmitted from the Prophet without interruption, then both of them would have to be from the Quran as revealed by God. They would not dif‌ fer from the point of view of the source of the transmission, but from that of their meaning. When we know, in general, that one of the two apparent senses [of the read‌ ing] is not what is, in reality, intended, then there is no choice but to abandon both of them and fall back on the principle of literal or practical sense. The reason is that the proofs based on the [principles of] preponderance or optionality are entirely conjec‌ tural and include none that come from an authoritative source. We have discussed this matter at length in one of our published lectures on the science of U$i١l, entitled "The Principles of Islamic Law," under the section "Resolution and Contrariety and the Preponderance" [in the selection of contradictory evidence].

The Permissibility of the Recitation
[of the Readings] in Prayer

The majority of Sunni and Shiite scholars have maintained the permissibility of re‌ citing the Quran in the ritual prayers in any of the seven readings. In fact, a consen‌ sus has been claimed on this matter by many of them. Some have even permitted recitation according to any of the ten readings. Still others maintain that it is permis‌ sible to recite the Quran in any reading that conforms with one of the levels of Ara‌ bic,٣٢ and that agrees with one of the Uthmanic codices-even if it [happens to] be on probability-and whose chain of transmission is sound. Accordingly, they do not limit them to any specific number.
The truth of the matter is that what is required by the first condition is the imper‌
missibility of reciting any reading in the daily prayers that is not proven to have come from the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny) or from one of his lega‌ tees, the Infallible Ones (peace be upon them). The reason is that what is obligatory in the prayers is the recitation of the Quran. It is therefore not sufficient to recite something which is not of the Quran. Reason has independently deduced the neces‌ sity of obtaining something definitively certain to follow the knowledge of having worked to meet ones obligation. Hence, the only way to ensure complete compli‌ ance in the manner of performing the prayer is to repeat it after reciting from each different reading, or, at least, to repeat the variations in a single prayer. Consequently, in reciting the Fatil)a (Opening Sura), one would have to combine the two variant readings malik and malik. As for the complete sura that is required to be recited fol‌ lowing the Fatil)a, it would be incumbent, on the basis of the clearer evidence in this