What are the different grammatical analyses (أوجه الإعراب) of Allah’s saying: {There is to be no Rafath (sexual intercourse or obscene speech), nor Fusooq (disobedience), nor Jidaal (quarreling) during the Hajj} (Quran 2:197), and what are the sayings of the jurists (فقهاء) regarding its understanding, and the rulings (الأحكام) derived from it, along with mentioning the points of disagreement (أوجه الخلاف) and the different schools of thought (المذاهب المختلفة), and is there a view that Hajj is not invalidated by minor or major Rafath?

The questioner is advised to give attention to the Quran and its recitations (Qira'at), and to consult books that guide the recitations, such as the commentaries on the Shatibiyyah, Al-Hujjah by Ibn Khalawayh and Ibn Zanjalah, and books of Tafsir concerned with the grammatical analysis (I'rab) of the Quran. It is mentioned that Ibn Kathir, Abu 'Amr, Ya'qub, and Abu Ja'far recited "rafath" and "fusuq" with the nominative case (raf') and tanwin, while Abu Ja'far alone recited "jidal" with the nominative case. The grammatical analysis of "la" in the verse is explained for both recitations, where what follows it can be either built upon (mabni) or in the nominative case (marfu'), and the conjunction (atf) differs based on the recitation. It is emphasized that the difference in recitations does not affect legal rulings, and that jurists agree on the prohibition of rafath (obscene talk) in all its forms and the invalidation of Hajj by sexual intercourse before the first tahallul (partial desecration). It also mentions the disagreement among jurists regarding the invalidation of Hajj by intercourse outside the vagina with ejaculation, and their agreement that Hajj is not invalidated by foreplay without ejaculation.