The Common Verbal of the Fundamentalists and its Impact on the Difference of Scholars in the Jurisprudential Branches

The origin of the language is that each of its utterances has a specific meaning. Because words are a means of understanding, so the indication of each word on its connotation must be clear, independent, and specific; In order for the understanding to take place, and for the language to perform its function in the best way, however, it was found in the language otherwise, as the word is used to denote two or more meanings, which is what is called verbal association.
The verbal common has attracted the attention of the fundamentalists, so they took care of searching for the verbal common word, defining its nature, and clarifying its causes; This is because it is one of the important matters in extracting meanings from texts in which there are many expressions in the language of the Arabs, which is one of the reasons for the difference in deducing legal rulings. Therefore, I thought to research the verbal suffix and its impact on the differences of scholars in the branches of jurisprudence.
The research was divided into a preamble and four schools of thought. As for the preface, I talked about the Arabic word, considering the meaning that was set for it. As for the first topic, it defines the common for linguists and fundamentalists.
As for the second topic: I dealt with the occurrence of the participation in the language, and divided it into three demands, the first requirement in which the scholars’ statements about the occurrence of the language were clarified, and their evidence, the second requirement: the discussion and the statement of the most correct statement, and the third requirement: the reasons for the occurrence of the language.
As for the third topic, I examined the implementation of the common in all its meanings according to the fundamentalists, and divided it into two demands, the first requirement in the sayings of scholars regarding the implementation of the common in all of my meanings, and their evidence, and the second requirement: discussion and weighting.
As for the fourth topic, it dealt with the effect of the common in the difference of jurists.
Then I prepared a conclusion in which the most important results I reached.