A Qur’anic, grammatical and hadith-based study using Sunni and Shia sources

Introduction

The disagreement is not over whether Sunni books contain narrations describing the washing of the feet—they clearly do. The real questions are:

1. What does Qur’an 5:6 directly command?
2. Which interpretation follows the sentence without changing its verbs?
3. Do authentic Sunni sources preserve feet-wiping?
4. Did early Sunni authorities recognise wiping?
5. What do rigorously authenticated Imami narrations transmit from the Prophet ﷺ and the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt عليهم السلام?

When these questions are examined separately, wiping the bare feet emerges as the more direct Qur’anic reading, while washing depends more heavily upon external hadith interpretation and connecting “feet” to a distant verb.

This article does not claim that Sunni washing narrations do not exist. It argues that the Qur’anic wording, both canonical readings, grammatical proximity, several authenticated Sunni reports, early Muslim practice and consistently sahih Imami narrations collectively create a stronger direct textual case for wiping.

Chapter One

Qur’an 5:6: A Word-by-Word Examination

Allah says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ

English translation:

“O believers! When you rise for prayer, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet up to the ankles.”

1. فَاغْسِلُوا — “Wash”

The imperative comes from:

غَسَلَ — to wash

In ordinary Arabic, washing involves applying or causing water to flow over the object.

The objects immediately governed by فاغسلوا are:

وُجُوهَكُمْ — your faces

and:

وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ — your hands/arms up to the elbows

Thus, the first legal unit is:

فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ

“Wash your faces and your arms.”

2. وَامْسَحُوا — “And wipe”

Allah then introduces a second and different imperative:

وَامْسَحُوا — and wipe

This is not a repetition of فاغسلوا. It introduces a separate act of purification.

Its first object is:

بِرُءُوسِكُمْ — your heads

Then the feet are mentioned:

وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ / وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ — and your feet

The verse therefore contains two commands and four bodily members:

First command

فاغسلوا — wash

• faces
• arms

Second command

وامسحوا — wipe

• heads
• feet

The Qur’an does not say:

وَاغْسِلُوا أَرْجُلَكُمْ

“And wash your feet.”

That wording would have ended the dispute immediately. Instead, “feet” appears only after the new command وامسحوا.

3. The genitive reading: وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ

One accepted canonical recitation reads:

وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ

Here, the letter ل in أرجلِكم carries kasrah.

The grammatical relationship is direct:

بِرُءُوسِكُمْ — your heads

وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ — and your feet

The feet are coordinated with the heads. Since the command governing the heads is وامسحوا, the same command governs the feet:

“Wipe your heads and your feet.”

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi records the grammatical consequence:

فَكَمَا وَجَبَ الْمَسْحُ فِي الرَّأْسِ فَكَذَلِكَ فِي الْأَرْجُلِ

English:

“Just as wiping is obligatory for the head, it is likewise obligatory for the feet.”

Al-Razi identifies Ibn Kathir, Hamzah, Abu ʿAmr and Abu Bakr’s transmission from ʿAsim among those reading the word with the genitive ending. He recognises that its apparent grammar joins the feet to the heads. (Islamweb)

Result

The genitive recitation does not merely make wiping “possible.” Its straightforward grammatical reading is:

Head: wipe

Feet: wipe

To convert it into washing, an additional grammatical device must be introduced.

4. The accusative reading: وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ

The Hafs recitation commonly used today reads:

وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ

with fatḥah.

The standard Sunni argument is:

• وجوهكم is accusative and washed.
• أيديكم is accusative and washed.
• أرجلكم is also accusative.
• Therefore, feet must be joined to the earlier washed members.

This is a possible analysis, but it is not the only valid Arabic analysis.

The grammatical position of برؤوسكم

In:

وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ

the word رؤوسكم is visibly genitive because of the preposition بـ.

However, the complete phrase is the object of امسحوا. Its syntactic position is therefore:

فِي مَحَلِّ نَصْبٍ

“In the accusative syntactic position.”

Consequently, Arabic permits:

• أرجلِكم: coordination to the visible genitive form of رؤوسكم.
• أرجلَكم: coordination to the syntactic position of رؤوسكم.

Both constructions produce:

وامسحوا برؤوسكم وأرجلكم

“Wipe your heads and your feet.”

Al-Razi acknowledges that joining the accusative feet to the syntactic position of the heads is:

مَذْهَبٌ مَشْهُورٌ لِلنُّحَاةِ

“A well-known position among grammarians.”

He further explains that both فاغسلوا and وامسحوا could theoretically govern the accusative word, but the nearer verb has priority:

إِعْمَالُ الْأَقْرَبِ أَوْلَى

“Giving effect to the nearer governing word is preferable.”

He therefore records the conclusion:

قِرَاءَةُ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ بِنَصْبِ اللَّامِ تُوجِبُ الْمَسْحَ أَيْضًا

English:

“The accusative reading of wa-arjulakum also entails wiping.”

Al-Razi ultimately favours washing for hadith-based and precautionary reasons, but his grammatical analysis confirms that the accusative recitation does not exclusively mean washing. (Islamweb)

5. The admission of Abu Bakr al-Jassas al-Hanafi

The prominent Hanafi Qur’anic jurist Abu Bakr al-Jassas examines both readings and concludes:

احْتِمَالُ كُلِّ وَاحِدَةٍ مِنَ الْقِرَاءَتَيْنِ لِلْمَسْحِ وَالْغَسْلِ

English:

“Each of the two recitations is capable of indicating wiping and washing.”

He then argues that external evidence must be used to select the final legal ruling.

This admission is important. The claim that “fatḥah unquestionably proves washing” is stronger than what al-Jassas himself was willing to say. According to him, the verse’s grammatical possibilities include wiping in both readings. His final Hanafi ruling was based on his evaluation of hadith, not on the impossibility of the wiping grammar. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn ʿAli al-Jassas
• Ahkam al-Qur’an
• Commentary on Qur’an 5:6
• Chapter: باب غسل الرجلين
• Common edition: vol. 3, pp. 349–351

6. Ibn Hazm’s explicit admission

The Zahiri authority Ibn Hazm writes:

فَإِنَّ الْقُرْآنَ نَزَلَ بِالْمَسْحِ

English:

“The Qur’an was revealed with wiping.”

He explains that whether أرجلكم is read with kasrah or fatḥah, it is connected to the heads:

إِمَّا عَلَى اللَّفْظِ وَإِمَّا عَلَى الْمَوْضِعِ

English:

“Either according to the visible form or according to the syntactic position.”

His reasoning is that an independent new clause—وامسحوا برؤوسكم—should not be inserted between the earlier washed objects and the feet, only for the feet to jump backward over that intervening clause.

Ibn Hazm’s final legal position was washing, because he believed later Prophetic reports added or superseded the earlier wiping rule. Nevertheless, his admission remains unambiguous: according to his grammatical analysis, the Qur’anic text itself came with wiping. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi
• al-Muhalla bi-l-Athar
• Book of Purification
• “The two feet in wudu”
• vol. 1, pp. 301–303 in the cited edition

7. The parallel construction of the verse

The verse follows a balanced structure:

فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ

“Wash your faces and arms.”

Then:

وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ

“Wipe your heads and feet.”

The wiping interpretation follows:

• the order of the words,
• the nearest verb,
• the nearest coordinated noun,
• the genitive recitation,
• and the syntactic position in the accusative recitation.

The washing interpretation requires the reader to understand:

Wash the face and arms; wipe the head; then return backward over the wiping clause and wash the feet.

That reading is not grammatically impossible, but it is less immediate and requires a longer-distance connection.

8. “Up to the ankles” does not transform wiping into washing

A common argument says that because Allah says:

إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ — up to the ankles

the feet must be washed.

But an endpoint determines the extent of an act, not the nature of the act.

For example:

“Wipe the surface up to its edge.”

The words “up to its edge” do not transform wiping into washing. They merely identify the endpoint.

Similarly:

وامسحوا … وأرجلكم إلى الكعبين

means that the prescribed wiping extends to the designated ankle boundary.

Al-Razi records that proponents of wiping expressly answered the ankle objection by maintaining that the upper surface should be wiped to the two ankle points. (Islamweb)

Chapter Two

Why the Exclusive Sunni Grammatical Claims Are Weak

Claim One: “Fatḥah means washing only”

This is linguistically excessive.

The accusative ending permits two analyses:

1. Coordination to the distant washed members.
2. Coordination to the syntactic position of برؤوسكم.

Al-Jassas, al-Razi and Ibn Hazm all acknowledge the second construction.

Therefore, the accurate conclusion is:

Fatḥah permits washing, but it does not force washing.

The wiping interpretation remains grammatically normal.

Claim Two: “The kasrah exists only because of neighbouring words”

To avoid the direct result of أرجلِكم being joined to رؤوسكم, some grammarians use:

الْجَرُّ بِالْمُجَاوَرَةِ

“Genitive through neighbourhood.”

The suggested example is:

جُحْرُ ضَبٍّ خَرِبٍ

where an adjective may apparently take the case-ending of a neighbouring noun rather than the noun it truly describes.

Al-Razi records three objections to applying this device to Qur’an 5:6:

1. Such usage is treated as an irregularity tolerated especially in poetic necessity.
2. It is used only where no ambiguity can arise.
3. It normally occurs without an explicit conjunction, whereas Qur’an 5:6 contains وَ — and.

He describes this answer to the wiping grammar as invalid within the argument he records. (Islamweb)

Rational problem

The Qur’an already supplies a perfectly regular construction:

برؤوسكم وأرجلِكم

“Your heads and your feet.”

There is no need to invoke an exceptional grammatical device when direct coordination gives a coherent meaning.

Claim Three: “Masḥ means light washing”

It is true that Arabic usage may occasionally employ مسح in a broad sense involving water. But the verse itself distinguishes:

غسل — washing

from:

مسح — wiping

If both were meant to be identical here, the deliberate change of verbs would lose its legal significance.

Furthermore, the same verb governs the head. No Sunni school understands:

وامسحوا برؤوسكم

as a command to wash the head by pouring water over it.

It is therefore inconsistent to make one governing verb mean:

• literal wiping for the head,
• but normal washing for the coordinated feet,

unless clear evidence requires that change.

Claim Four: “The feet must return to the first verb because they are washed in hadith”

This is not a grammatical proof. It is a hadith-based interpretation imposed upon the grammar.

A scholar may believe that authentic Sunnah explains the verse as washing. But that is different from claiming that Arabic grammar independently forces washing.

The distinction is crucial:

Grammar question: What does the sentence most directly say?

Hadith question: Do external narrations require the apparent wording to be reinterpreted?

Prominent Sunni scholars such as Ibn Hazm, al-Jassas and al-Razi admitted the Qur’anic grammatical case for wiping even when their final jurisprudential conclusion favoured washing.

A significant modern Sunni admission: Tafsir al-Manar

Rashid Rida’s Tafsir al-Manar acknowledges:

• the apparent meaning of the genitive reading is wiping,
• both washing and wiping were narrated from early Muslims,
• and returning the accusative reading to the wiping construction can be grammatically stronger.

He writes that interpreting “wiping the feet” as washing is:

وَهُوَ تَكَلُّفٌ ظَاهِرٌ

English:

“An evident grammatical strain.”

He nevertheless prefers a combined wet action and follows the broader Sunni washing practice. His discussion is valuable because it openly admits that the wiping construction is not linguistically artificial; rather, some attempts to escape it are themselves strained. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• Muhammad Rashid Rida
• Tafsir al-Manar
• vol. 6, pp. 185–194
• Commentary on Qur’an 5:6

Chapter Three

Feet-Wiping in Authenticated Sunni Hadith and Athar

1. The strongest direct Prophetic narration: Rifaʿah ibn Rafiʿ

Rifaʿah ibn Rafiʿ narrates that the Prophet ﷺ taught the person who had performed his prayer incorrectly. The Prophet explained that prayer is incomplete until a person performs wudu as Allah commanded.

The legally relevant wording is:

فَيَغْسِلَ وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ إِلَى الْمِرْفَقَيْنِ، وَيَمْسَحَ بِرَأْسِهِ وَرِجْلَيْهِ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ

English:

“He washes his face and hands up to the elbows, and wipes his head and feet up to the ankles.”

Why this report is especially powerful

It does not merely describe what a narrator thought he saw. It explains the obligatory wudu:

كَمَا أَمَرَهُ اللهُ

“As Allah commanded him.”

It then uses two clear verbs:

• يغسل: face and arms
• يمسح: head and feet

There is no mention of:

• khuffs,
• socks,
• sandals,
• or footwear.

Sunni authentication

Badr al-Din al-ʿAyni judged:

إِسْنَادُهُ صَحِيحٌ عَلَى شَرْطِ الْبُخَارِي

“Its chain is authentic according to al-Bukhari’s conditions.”

Al-Albani also graded the Abu Dawud version:

صحيح — authentic

Complete Sunni references

• Abu Dawud, al-Sunan, no. 858
• al-Nasa’i, no. 1136
• al-Darimi, no. 1368
• al-Tirmidhi, no. 302, with similar wording
• Ibn Majah, no. 460
• al-Tahawi, Sharh Maʿani al-Athar, no. 161
• al-ʿAyni, Nukhb al-Afkar, vol. 1, p. 309 (dorar.net)

Sunni interpretive response

The modern Dorar commentary interprets ورجليه as washing because of the established Sunni doctrine. But that interpretation is supplied by the commentary; the transmitted wording itself places the feet after يمسح. (dorar.net)

2. ʿUthman ibn ʿAffan wiped the upper surfaces of his feet

Humran narrates that ʿUthman called for water, performed wudu, washed his face and arms, and then:

وَمَسَحَ بِرَأْسِهِ وَظَهْرِ قَدَمَيْهِ

English:

“He wiped his head and the upper surfaces of his feet.”

After demonstrating the wudu, ʿUthman said that he had seen the Messenger of Allah ﷺ perform wudu as he had performed it.

Authentication

Shuʿayb al-Arna’ut graded the report:

صَحِيحٌ لِغَيْرِهِ

“Authentic due to supporting evidence.”

Complete references

• Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, no. 415
• ʿAbd ibn Humayd, al-Musnad, no. 59
• al-Bazzar, al-Musnad, no. 420
• Grading: Shuʿayb al-Arna’ut, commentary on Musnad Ahmad, no. 415 (dorar.net)

Sunni counterinterpretation

Sunni commentators commonly interpret this as wiping over khuffs, because other stronger and more famous narrations from ʿUthman describe washing.

However, the actual wording quoted above does not mention khuffs. The footwear explanation is a later harmonisation with the majority legal position. This report is therefore genuine supporting evidence for wiping, though it should not be used alone while ignoring ʿUthman’s washing narrations.

3. Anas ibn Malik and al-Hajjaj

Al-Hajjaj instructed people to pay special attention to washing the feet because of their exposure to dirt.

Anas ibn Malik responded:

صَدَقَ اللهُ وَكَذَبَ الْحَجَّاجُ

English:

“Allah has spoken truth, and al-Hajjaj has spoken falsely.”

He then recited:

وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ

Al-Tabari also reports that when Anas wiped his feet, he made them wet. (Islamweb)

References

• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan, vol. 10, pp. 58–59
• reports 11475 and 11477
• Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf
• Saʿid ibn Mansur, al-Sunan
• al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, commentary on Qur’an 5:6

Ibn Kathir considered the chain of the cited Anas report authentic, as subsequently recorded by al-Qasimi. (Shamela)

Important counter-report from Anas

Al-Tabari also records Anas saying:

نَزَلَ الْقُرْآنُ بِالْمَسْحِ، وَالسُّنَّةُ الْغَسْلُ

English:

“The Qur’an came with wiping, while the Sunnah came with washing.”

This means Anas’s evidence must be presented honestly:

• he recognised that the Qur’anic wording gives wiping;
• another report attributes to him the view that Prophetic practice established washing.

This does not weaken the claim that the Qur’an directly says wiping. It shows that some early Sunnis resolved the apparent conflict by making washing a Sunnah-based explanation or addition. (Islamweb)

4. Ibn ʿAbbas: two washings and two wipings

Ibn ʿAbbas is reported to have said:

الْوُضُوءُ غَسْلَتَانِ وَمَسْحَتَانِ

English:

“Wudu consists of two washings and two wipings.”

Another fuller form states that Allah prescribed two washings and two wipings, and that in tayammum the two washed members are replaced with wiping while the two already-wiped members are omitted.

Natural identification

The four members in Qur’an 5:6 are:

• face: washed
• arms: washed
• head: wiped
• feet: wiped

References

• ʿAbd al-Razzaq al-Sanʿani, al-Musannaf, vol. 1, p. 19, no. 54
• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan, commentary on Qur’an 5:6
• al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, vol. 3, p. 206 in common editions (Islamweb)

Grading dispute

Some editions and later scholars accepted routes for this report. Al-Nawawi, however, argued that the attribution was not established and cited contrary reports from Ibn ʿAbbas supporting washing.

Therefore, debate-safe wording is:

“The wiping position is transmitted from Ibn ʿAbbas through early Sunni compilations, but Sunni hadith critics disagreed over the strength and final interpretation of those transmissions.”

It should not be presented as unanimously authenticated. (Islamweb)

5. ʿIkrimah

Al-Tabari records from ʿIkrimah:

لَيْسَ عَلَى الرِّجْلَيْنِ غَسْلٌ، إِنَّمَا نَزَلَ فِيهِمَا الْمَسْحُ

English:

“There is no washing prescribed for the feet; only wiping was revealed concerning them.”

Al-Tabari also records a practical report from someone who accompanied ʿIkrimah and did not see him wash his feet; he wiped them. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan
• vol. 10, pp. 59–61
• reports 11478 and 11486

6. ʿAmir al-Shaʿbi

Al-Shaʿbi said:

نَزَلَ جِبْرِيلُ بِالْمَسْحِ

English:

“Jibril descended with wiping.”

He reasoned that tayammum replaces the members washed in wudu—face and hands—with wiping, while omitting the members already wiped in normal wudu—head and feet.

References

• Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, Book of Purification, chapter on wiping the feet
• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan, reports 11480–11485 (Islamweb)

7. Qatadah

Qatadah said:

افْتَرَضَ اللهُ غَسْلَتَيْنِ وَمَسْحَتَيْنِ

English:

“Allah prescribed two washings and two wipings.”

Reference:

• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan, report 11487
• related report in ʿAbd al-Razzaq’s Musannaf (Islamweb)

8. Imam ʿAli in an authenticated Sunni report

Al-Nazzal ibn Sabrah narrates that Imam ʿAli, while already in a state of purity, took a handful of water and:

فَمَسَحَ بِهَا وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ وَرَأْسَهُ وَرِجْلَيْهِ

English:

“He wiped with it his face, hands, head and feet.”

He then said:

هَذَا وُضُوءُ مَنْ لَمْ يُحْدِثْ

“This is the wudu of one who has not broken his purity.”

The report states that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had acted similarly.

Al-ʿAyni states that the narrators are narrators of the Sahih except Ibrahim ibn Marzuq, while al-Bayhaqi calls the report established. Versions are found in al-Nasa’i, al-Tahawi and related Sunni collections. (Shamela)

Necessary limitation

This was not the initial obligatory wudu after ritual impurity. Imam ʿAli was already pure.

Therefore, it proves:

• the authenticity of feet-wiping language and practice from Imam ʿAli in Sunni literature;
• but it does not independently settle the minimum obligation after hadath.

Using it without mentioning the renewal-wudu context would be misleading.

9. Imam Muhammad al-Baqir in Sunni tafsir

Al-Tabari records from Imam Abu Jaʿfar Muhammad al-Baqir:

امْسَحْ عَلَى رَأْسِكَ وَقَدَمَيْكَ

English:

“Wipe your head and your feet.”

Al-Razi also reports through al-Qaffal that the obligatory wiping position was attributed to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. (Islamweb)

Grading

The specific al-Tabari chain includes disputed transmitters and should not be labelled sahih by strict Sunni standards.

Its correct evidentiary value is:

A classical Sunni historical attestation of Imam al-Baqir’s wiping position—not a fully authenticated Sunni isnad.

Chapter Four

Sunni Authorities Who Accepted or Admitted Feet-Wiping

These scholars must be divided honestly. Some practised or legally accepted wiping. Others admitted its Qur’anic basis but ultimately preferred washing.

Category One: Early authorities who supported wiping

1. ʿIkrimah

He explicitly denied that washing was revealed for the feet and is reported to have practised wiping. (Islamweb)

2. Al-Shaʿbi

He said that Jibril brought the command of wiping and supported it through the tayammum analogy. (Islamweb)

3. Qatadah

He described the Qur’anic wudu as two washings and two wipings. (Islamweb)

4. Al-Hasan al-Basri

Al-Jassas reports:

الْمَحْفُوظُ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ الْبَصْرِيِّ اسْتِيعَابُ الرِّجْلِ كُلِّهَا بِالْمَسْحِ

English:

“What is preserved from al-Hasan al-Basri is wiping the entire foot.”

His method involved wiping more of the foot than the Imami minimum, but the legal action he recognised was wiping.

Reference:

• al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur’an
• commentary on Qur’an 5:6
• vol. 3, approximately p. 350 in common editions (Islamweb)

Category Two: Jurists who included wiping within the legal obligation

5. Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari

Al-Tabari’s actual conclusion needs precision. He did not simply teach the Imami method of wiping the upper surface with remaining moisture.

He held that the feet must be comprehensively passed over with the hand and water. He described the result as both wiping and washing, because:

• water reaches the entire foot;
• and the hand passes over it.

He preferred the genitive reading because joining the feet to the nearby heads was more natural than joining them to the distant arms across the intervening clause. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• al-Tabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan
• vol. 10, pp. 62–65
• commentary following report 11493

Correct conclusion about al-Tabari

Al-Tabari should not be falsely presented as an exact Twelver Shia jurist.

However, he clearly held that the Qur’anic governing concept is:

comprehensive wet wiping of the feet,

rather than merely pouring water over them without passing the hand.

6. Dawud al-Zahiri

Classical Sunni sources give differing accounts of Dawud’s precise position:

• some attribute to him the obligation of combining washing and wiping;
• others report a choice between them.

Al-Razi reports:

يَجِبُ الْجَمْعُ بَيْنَهُمَا

English:

“Both must be combined.”

Thus, even where Dawud did not accept wiping alone, he did not regard washing alone as exhausting all the Qur’anic language. (Islamweb)

Category Three: Scholars who admitted the Qur’anic wiping case but preferred washing

7. Abu Bakr al-Jassas

Al-Jassas admits that both canonical readings grammatically bear wiping and washing. His final Hanafi ruling relies on hadith evidence rather than a denial of wiping grammar. (Islamweb)

8. Ibn Hazm

Ibn Hazm states plainly that the Qur’an came with wiping and that both recitations coordinate the feet with the heads. He later accepts washing because of his treatment of the Sunnah evidence. (Islamweb)

9. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi

Al-Razi records that:

• the genitive reading entails wiping;
• the accusative reading also allows wiping;
• coordination to the nearer verb is preferable;
• grammatical-neighbourhood objections are seriously problematic.

He nevertheless adopts washing on the basis of numerous washing reports and precaution. (Islamweb)

10. Ibn Taymiyyah

Ibn Taymiyyah states that the verse requires a shared concept of wiping for the head and feet. He then distinguishes:

• wiping without flowing water for the head;
• wiping accompanied by flowing water for the feet.

His final practice is therefore effectively washing with hand-passing, not the Imami method. But his argument admits that the verb مسح governs both members and must retain a shared semantic basis. (Islamweb)

Reference:

• Ibn Taymiyyah
• Majmuʿ al-Fatawa
• vol. 21, p. 133
• discussion of washing the feet

11. Rashid Rida

Rashid Rida acknowledges:

• the apparent genitive reading gives wiping;
• wiping and washing were both transmitted from the Salaf;
• returning the accusative construction to wiping may be grammatically stronger;
• interpreting “wipe the feet” as “wash them” is visibly strained.

His final preference is a combined action and the broader Sunni tradition, not exclusive Imami wiping. Nevertheless, his linguistic concessions are highly significant. (Islamweb)

Chapter Five

Strictly Sahih Imami Narrations from the Fourteen-Infallible Tradition

Important methodological clarification

It would be dishonest to claim that a separate strictly sahih narration survives from each one of the Fourteen Infallibles specifically on this single detail of wudu.

Shia jurisprudence does not require every Imam to repeat every ruling. A sahih narration from one Imam is authoritative, especially when multiple Imams consistently transmit the same practice from the Prophet ﷺ.

The strict evidence below comes from:

• Prophet Muhammad ﷺ through Imam al-Baqir;
• Imam Muhammad al-Baqir;
• Imam Jaʿfar al-Sadiq;
• Imam ʿAli al-Rida عليهم السلام.

Only reports explicitly authenticated as sahih are placed in the main list.

1. The Prophet ﷺ wiped his head and feet with remaining moisture

Arabic chain and legally relevant text

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى، عَنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ أَبَانٍ وَجَمِيلٍ، عَنْ زُرَارَةَ

Imam al-Baqir demonstrated the wudu of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. After washing the face and arms:

ثُمَّ مَسَحَ بِمَا بَقِيَ فِي يَدِهِ رَأْسَهُ وَرِجْلَيْهِ، وَلَمْ يُعِدْهُمَا فِي الإِنَاءِ

English:

“Then, with what remained on his hand, he wiped his head and feet and did not return his hands to the vessel.”

Legal implications

The Prophet ﷺ:

• took water for the face;
• took water for the arms;
• did not take fresh water for the head and feet;
• used the moisture remaining on his hand;
• performed masḥ, not a fresh washing.

Complete reference

• Muhammad ibn Yaʿqub al-Kulayni
• al-Kafi
• vol. 3, Book of Purification
• Book 1, chapter 17: صفة الوضوء
• hadith 1
• standard printed page approximately p. 24

Authentication

ʿAllamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi:

صَحِيح

“Sahih.”

• Mirʾat al-ʿUqul
• vol. 13, p. 72 (Thaqalayn)

2. Imam al-Baqir and Imam al-Sadiq: wash two, wipe two

Arabic chain

عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ وَأَبِي دَاوُدَ، عَنِ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ فَضَالَةَ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ بْنِ فَرْقَدٍ

Imam al-Sadiq transmitted his father Imam al-Baqir’s definition of wudu:

تَغْسِلُ وَجْهَكَ وَيَدَيْكَ، وَتَمْسَحُ رَأْسَكَ وَرِجْلَيْكَ

English:

“You wash your face and hands, and wipe your head and feet.”

This is perhaps the clearest possible legal wording.

The narration does not say:

“Wash or wipe the feet.”

It deliberately divides the members:

• تغسل: face and hands
• تمسح: head and feet

Complete reference

• al-Kulayni, al-Kafi
• vol. 3, Book 1
• chapter 14: water required for wudu and excessive use
• hadith 3
• standard printed page approximately p. 21

Authentication

Al-Majlisi:

الْحَدِيثُ الثَّالِثُ: صَحِيح

“The third hadith is sahih.”

• Mirʾat al-ʿUqul
• vol. 13, p. 67 (Thaqalayn)

3. Imam al-Sadiq’s practical wudu

Arabic chain

الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ عَامِرٍ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ مَهْزِيَارَ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ يَحْيَى، عَنْ حَمَّادِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ

Hammad ibn ʿUthman witnessed Imam al-Sadiq perform wudu. After applying water to the face and arms:

ثُمَّ مَسَحَ عَلَى رَأْسِهِ وَرِجْلَيْهِ

English:

“Then he wiped his head and his feet.”

The Imam then described this as wudu without transgressing the divinely prescribed limits.

Complete reference

• al-Kulayni, al-Kafi
• vol. 3, Book 1
• chapter 17: صفة الوضوء
• hadith 8
• standard printed page approximately pp. 26–27

Authentication

Al-Majlisi:

الْحَدِيثُ الثَّامِنُ: صَحِيح

“The eighth hadith is sahih.”

• Mirʾat al-ʿUqul
• vol. 13, p. 78 (Thaqalayn)

4. Imam al-Rida demonstrates the method of wiping

Arabic chain

عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي نَصْرٍ، عَنْ أَبِي الْحَسَنِ الرِّضَا

Al-Bazanti asked Imam ʿAli al-Rida how the feet should be wiped.

The Imam:

فَوَضَعَ كَفَّهُ عَلَى الْأَصَابِعِ، فَمَسَحَهَا إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ إِلَى ظَاهِرِ الْقَدَمِ

English:

“He placed his palm upon the toes and wiped toward the ankles over the upper surface of the foot.”

What this establishes

• The act is masḥ.
• The place is the upper surface.
• The direction demonstrated is from the toes toward the ankle boundary.
• The bare foot—not a khuff—is being discussed.

Complete reference

• al-Kulayni, al-Kafi
• vol. 3, Book 1
• chapter 19: مسح الرأس والقدمين
• hadith 6
• standard printed page p. 30

Authentication

Al-Majlisi classified it:

صَحِيح

The narration is also described as Sahih al-Bazanti by al-Shahid al-Awwal and as sahih by al-ʿAllamah al-Hilli. (Thaqalayn)

Additional references:

• al-ʿAllamah al-Hilli, Muntaha al-Matlab, vol. 2, p. 67 in the cited edition
• al-Shahid al-Awwal, al-Dhikra, vol. 1, discussion of wiping the feet

5. Sahih narration from Imam al-Sadiq on wiping direction

Hammad ibn ʿUthman narrates from Imam al-Sadiq:

لَا بَأْسَ بِمَسْحِ الْقَدَمَيْنِ مُقْبِلًا وَمُدْبِرًا

English:

“There is no problem in wiping the feet forward or backward.”

The primary subject is the direction of wiping, but the accepted legal act is expressly:

مَسْحِ الْقَدَمَيْنِ

“Wiping the feet.”

References

• al-Shaykh al-Tusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam
• vol. 1, p. 57 in common editions
• chapter on the method of wudu
• al-ʿAllamah al-Hilli calls it a sahih report from Hammad ibn ʿUthman
• Muntaha al-Matlab, old edition, vol. 1, p. 64 (Eshia Library)

Strong corroborating reports not placed in the strict sahih list

Imam al-Baqir’s grammatical explanation

Imam al-Baqir explains that Allah joined the feet to the head just as He joined the hands to the face:

ثُمَّ وَصَلَ الرِّجْلَيْنِ بِالرَّأْسِ كَمَا وَصَلَ الْيَدَيْنِ بِالْوَجْهِ

Al-Majlisi grades this narration كالصحيح — like sahih, not simply sahih. It is therefore strong corroboration but has not been deceptively placed among the strict sahih reports. (Thaqalayn)

Washing cannot replace the obligatory wiping

Another narration states that if a person replaces the wiping of the feet with washing while believing washing to be the prescribed obligation, it is not the required wudu.

Al-Majlisi grades the al-Kafi route hasan, although other Imami jurists classify parallel routes as sahih. It is therefore secondary corroboration rather than part of the strictest list. (Thaqalayn)

Chapter Six

The Strongest Sunni Counter-Evidence

A serious article cannot ignore the Sunni evidence for washing.

Sunni collections contain numerous authentic reports in which the Prophet ﷺ or Companions are described as washing the feet. The best-known evidence includes:

• the ʿUthman wudu narrations in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim;
• the narration of ʿAbdullah ibn ʿAmr concerning people inadequately purifying their heels;
• the warning:

وَيْلٌ لِلْأَعْقَابِ مِنَ النَّارِ

“Woe to the heels from the Fire.”

The four Sunni schools understood these reports as establishing obligatory washing of uncovered feet.

Why these reports do not erase the wiping case automatically

1. The warning concerns incomplete purification

The warning establishes that part of the foot or heel was left inadequately purified. It does not contain the explicit command:

“Replace wiping with washing.”

Al-Tabari himself used such reports to require comprehensive wet wiping with the hand and water, rather than to abandon the word masḥ entirely. (Islamweb)

2. Prescriptive wording is clearer than ambiguous description

The Rifaʿah narration explicitly says:

wash the face and arms; wipe the head and feet—exactly as Allah commanded.

This is more directly tied to Qur’an 5:6 than a narration merely saying that water was used on the feet.

3. Washing may contain physical wiping, but the reverse is not always true

Some Sunni scholars reconcile the texts by requiring water to cover the feet while the hand passes over them. This produces an action that can be called both washing and wiping.

However, it does not prove that the Qur’an’s direct word وامسحوا independently means ordinary washing.

4. Hadith transmission is genuinely divided

Sunni books themselves preserve:

• reports of washing;
• reports explicitly using مسح for the feet;
• Companion statements that the Qur’an came with wiping;
• early juristic disagreement.

Therefore, the claim that feet-wiping was a late Shia invention is historically indefensible.

Final Comparative Assessment

Evidence favouring wiping

Qur’an

• Feet occur after وامسحوا.
• The genitive recitation directly joins feet to heads.
• The accusative recitation can join feet to the syntactic position of heads.
• The nearest governing verb is وامسحوا.
• No verse says واغسلوا أرجلكم.

Arabic grammar

• Conjunction to the syntactic position is standard Arabic.
• Long-distance connection to فاغسلوا is possible but less immediate.
• Genitive-by-neighbourhood is exceptional and strongly challenged.
• Treating one verb as literal wiping for the head but washing for the feet requires an external indicator.

Sunni hadith

• Rifaʿah’s authenticated narration expressly uses washing for face/arms and wiping for head/feet.
• ʿUthman’s authenticated supporting report says he wiped the upper surfaces of his feet.
• Anas recognised the Qur’anic command as wiping.
• Early reports preserve wiping from ʿIkrimah, al-Shaʿbi and Qatadah.

Sunni scholarship

• Al-Hasan al-Basri is reported to have accepted wiping.
• Al-Tabari required comprehensive wet wiping.
• Al-Jassas admitted both readings can indicate wiping.
• Ibn Hazm stated that the Qur’an came with wiping.
• Al-Razi admitted that both readings support wiping grammatically.
• Ibn Taymiyyah retained wiping as the Qur’anic governing concept while interpreting foot-wiping as involving flowing water.
• Rashid Rida admitted that some Sunni grammatical escapes from wiping are visibly strained.

Sahih Imami hadith

• Prophet Muhammad ﷺ: wiped head and feet with remaining moisture.
• Imam al-Baqir: wash face and arms, wipe head and feet.
• Imam al-Sadiq: practically wiped head and feet.
• Imam al-Rida: demonstrated wiping from toes toward the ankles.
• The principal reports are explicitly graded sahih by major Imami hadith authorities.

Conclusion

The claim that Qur’an 5:6 clearly commands washing the feet is not sustainable as a purely grammatical claim.

The verse’s most direct arrangement is:

فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ

“Wash your faces and arms.”

Then:

وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ

“Wipe your heads and feet.”

The genitive reading makes feet-wiping explicit. The accusative reading also supports wiping through coordination to the syntactic position of برؤوسكم. Major Sunni grammarians and jurists acknowledged this, even when they eventually preferred washing because of their interpretation of other narrations.

Authentic Sunni literature preserves a Prophetic narration that expressly divides wudu into:

washing the face and arms

and:

wiping the head and feet.

It also preserves wiping reports and statements from Companions and early authorities. The Imami corpus then presents a consistent set of rigorously authenticated narrations in which the Prophet ﷺ and several Imams of Ahl al-Bayt perform and command feet-wiping.

The academically responsible conclusion is therefore:

Washing has extensive support in the later Sunni hadith-juristic tradition, but wiping the bare feet has the stronger direct Qur’anic wording, the more immediate grammatical structure, explicit authenticated Sunni textual support and an internally consistent body of sahih Ahl al-Bayt narrations.

Thus, the Shia wudu cannot reasonably be described as an innovation or a violation of Qur’an 5:6. On the contrary, it follows the verse’s two commands in their simplest and most natural division:

Two members are washed: the face and arms.

Two members are wiped: the head and feet.