Tafsir of Ash-Shu`ara' 26:177

(When Shu'ayb said to them: Will you not fear [Allah]?) It is not stated here "their brother," as it was stated elsewhere. It is said that "Al-Aykah" refers to dense, intertwined trees, and their trees were the Dum (Theban palm), which is the Muql. According to both opinions, the "People of the Aykah" are distinct from the people of Madyan. Among the strange narrations reported from Ibn Abbas is that they are the same as the people of Madyan.

The two Harami reciters (Mecca and Medina) and Ibn Amir read it as (Laykah) with an open Lam followed by a Ya, without an Alif, being diptote (non-declinable) here and in Surah Sad. Abu Ubaydah said: "We found in some books of Tafsir that Laykah is the name of the village, and Al-Aykah is the entire land, like Makkah and Bakkah." I saw it in the Imam—the Mushaf of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him)—in [the Surahs of] Al-Hijr and Qaf as Al-Aykah, and in Ash-Shu'ara and Sad as Laykah. Thereafter, the copies of the Amsar (metropolitan cities) were unanimous and did not differ.

In Al-Kashshaf, it is stated: "Whoever read it with the [vowel] Fatha claimed that Laykah is like the weight of Laylah, being the name of a town. This is a delusion led by the script of the Mushaf, as he found it written here and in [Sad] without an Alif. There are things in the Mushaf written contrary to the standard orthographic convention; they were written in these two Surahs according to the phonetic pronunciation, just as grammarians write la-anna (surely) or li-wali (for the sake of) to clarify the articulated pronunciation. It was written in the rest of the Quran according to the original [standard] root, even though the story is the same. Furthermore, Laykah is an unknown name."

This [argument] is rebutted by the fact that it is a claim without proof. Sufficient proof for the opponent is the establishment of this recitation among the seven, which is Mutawatir (mass-transmitted). Moreover, it is reinforced by what you have heard regarding some books of Tafsir, even if you do not rely upon them, and what Al-Bukhari narrated in his Sahih: "Al-Aykah and Laykah are the thicket."

Furthermore, there is no prohibition against arbitrary proper nouns. It is stated in Al-Bahr that the absence of the root L-Y-K in the language of the Arabs—which those who deny this Mutawatir recitation cling to—does not matter, even if true. The word would then be non-Arabic, and the roots of non-Arabic languages differ in many ways from the roots of the Arabic language. Thus, it would be prevented from declension due to being a proper noun, being non-Arabic, and having the feminine marker. In short, Zamakhshari’s denial of the validity of this recitation approaches apostasy—we seek refuge in Allah the Exalted. He was preceded in this by Al-Mubarrad, Ibn Qutaybah, Az-Zajjaj, Al-Farisi, and An-Nahhas.

It was also read as (Laykah) by deleting the Hamzah and casting its vowel onto the Lam, and [it is] genitive with a Kasra. It is written according to the phonetic pronunciation without a Hamzah, and according to the original root with a Hamzah, as is the case with its counterparts.