They say ‘your feet’ actually has nasb vowel...
They say ‘your feet’ actually has nasb vowel, but since it is adjacent to ‘your heads,’ which has jarr vowel, it has become a similar feature. These people have cited instances of ‘jarr because of an adjacent noun’ mentioned in ancient Arab poems and proverbs.
The counter argument for ‘jarr due to an adjacent noun’.The answer lies in Ibn Husham’s Mughni Al-Labib, the second rule of section eight, where he writes: Scholars believe that jarr due to an adjacent noun is rarely used for description or emphasis, but jarr due to an adjacent noun cannot occur in case of nouns joined by conjunctions since conjunctions do not allow vowels to be extended to the following noun.”(3) Sayrafi and Ibn Jinni have basically rejected jarr due to the adjacent noun.
(4) One may object to this explanation citing an ancient Arab poem as an example; yet, Ibn Husham himself replied to such an objection in the Fourth Section of Mughni Al-Labib quoting some people as saying that in case of an agent or an adjective, normally with nasb vowel, it is basically allowed to add a noun with vowel jarr to them. They give evidence from an ancient Arab poem, too (5).
When an agent has a sense of past tense, it is only added to another noun, but it cannot affect the vowel of that noun. It is now clear that jarr due to an adjacent noun is not a grounded possibility. In general, we conclude that first; some grammarians such as Sirafi and Ibn Jinni have basically rejected the rule of jarr due to an adjacent vowel.
Second; if we accept this rule, the scholars (as to Ibn Husham) have said that there are very rare instances in cases of description and emphasis, but not in connection to a previous manner as in our case. Further, how can one interpret the Holy Quran with such a rare possibility? The Holy Quran is the most eloquent of the words which men and jinn are unable to replicate. Is it not imposing one’s own unjustified inclination to the Holy Quran?