Islam and the Quran

THE ISSUE OF MASAH (WIPING) OVER THE FEET

The main objective of this study is to examine and evaluate the reasons for the dispute regarding the washing or wiping of feet during ablution, in light of the Quranic Verses and Hadiths, without being restrained by any particular school of thought or opinion.

THIS WORK IS A SUMMARY OF AYŞE ULYA ÖZEK’S MASTER’S THESIS, PUBLISHED IN TURKISH IN BOOK FORM BY SULEYMANIYE VAKFI YAYINLARI (2023).

FOREWORD

In Islam, the primary sources of rulings are the Qur’an and its practical application in the Sunnah of Prophet (Nabi) Muhammad (peace be upon him). However, the failure to evaluate the relevant Verses and Hadiths according to a certain methodology has inevitably led to differences of opinion, both in the past and present. The approach to the feet during ablution has also been an issue of dispute because of such a difference.

While Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah suggests, from the perspective of the Arabic language, that the feet should be wiped, the washing narrations in the Hadiths have been the primary cause of this disagreement. The different recitations (Qira’at) of the word “arjul (ارجل) / feet” in the Verse have further complicated the matter. After the passing of The Messanger of Allah (peace be upon him), the transmission of narrations regarding both washing and masah (wiping) led to different interpretations.

However, the issue would be easily resolved had the timing of the revelation of the Verse and its application been considered. The relevant Verse, which states the necessity of performing ablution before praying, was revealed during the Medina period. However, it is known that the prayer was made obligatory during the Mecca period and the Messenger of Allah certainly performed his prayers with ablution. There was no disagreement that the Messenger of Allah washed his feet during ablution until Verse 6 of Surah al-Ma’idah was revealed. The practice of masah (wiping) over the feet began after this Verse.

There is no significant difference among the opinions of Sunni Schools of Thought on this matter, but there is serious disagreement between Sunni Islam and the Imamiyyah Shia. The main objective of this study is to examine and evaluate the issues causing the dispute in light of the Quranic Verses and Hadiths, without being influenced by any particular School of Thought or opinion.

It is my sincere wish that this book, which serves as a summary of my master’s thesis, contributes to the correct understanding of the divine intent on this contentious issue.

Fatih, 2023

Ayşe Ulya ÖZEK

 

I. INTRODUCTION

Since ablution (wudu) is a prerequisite for prayer, performing it duly is extremely important. The question “Is masah (wiping) over the feet sufficient during ablution or not?” has been a long-standing debate among Muslims. Therefore, it is meaningful to reconsider this issue from all aspects and with all its pieces of evidence.

When the available sources are examined, the following different opinions regarding the approach to the feet during ablution are observed:

  1. The feet must be washed.
  2. The feet must be wiped over.
  3. A person is free to choose between washing or wiping.
  4. The feet must be wiped as if they were being washed.
  5. Washing the feet is not sufficient, they must also be rubbed.

While the Sunni Schools of Thought and the Zaidiyyah sect from Shia Islam adopt the washing view, some Shia sects, especially the Imamiyyah sect along with some Sunni commentators (mufassirs) and jurists (fuqaha), endorse the masah (wiping) view. Although other views do not have followers in terms of being recognised as a distinct School of Thought, they are defended by some commentators and jurists.

Despite having a single Verse describing the ablution (wudu), there are different opinions regarding the approach to the feet. Its first reason is the different recitations (Qira’at) of the relevant word in the Verse and the different rulings inferred from it. The second reason is the presence of narrations in the Hadiths, more frequently advocating washing but likewise supporting both washing and wiping.

The proponents of each view read and interpret the Verse in line with their perspective, highlight the narrations that support their view, and either ignore or reinterpret other narrations. It is observed that commentators and jurists affiliated with a particular School of Thought generally exhibit this attitude.

When the pieces of evidence for these views are examined, it is seen that different recitations (Qira’at) and grammatical structure of the Verse are analysed, the Hadiths that reflect a certain view are studied, cleanliness aspect of ablution and caution are emphasised. However, the following points are rarely addressed: What was the ablution of the Prophet (peace be upon him) like before the revelation of Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah and what information was it based on? Was the ablution performed before the revelation of this Verse according to the previous Sharia laws? Did the practice of ablution change after the revelation of this Verse, indicating an instance of abrogation? Does the ‘completion of favor’ mentioned at the end of the Verse imply an ease or facilitation compared to the practice of previous communities? If so, does this ease refer to tayammum (dry ablution) mentioned in the Verse or is it about masah (wiping) over the feet?

With the increase and ease of transportation options, Muslims today travel to various parts of the world for different reasons (Hajj-Umrah, business-commerce, travel, preaching, conferences-symposiums, etc.) more often than before. In such places, it is observed that some Muslims from different countries wipe over their socks or bare feet during ablution, which is found strange, especially by Muslims from predominantly Sunni countries like Turkiye, who take jurisprudential matters at the level of catechism. In particular, in diverse gatherings, when some individuals are seen wiping over their socks or bare feet, those with sectarian knowledge that this is not permissible often consult various authorities and the topic gets discussed on social media and internet sites. Therefore, addressing the practice of masah (wiping), which offers more convenience compared to washing, has become increasingly important today.

When examining the fatwas given and the discussions held on the permissibility of wiping over bare feet, it is observed that the views presented (although there are a few different opinions) are considered within a narrow framework and largely repeat the opinions of particular Schools of Thought. Therefore, it has become necessary to address the issue comprehensively and objectively, and provide satisfactory answers to the questions that arise in people’s minds.

II. THE CONCEPT OF MASAH (WIPING)

Disputes arising in various matters can sometimes stem from differences in the meanings attributed to concepts or from changes in meanings over time. Some of the disagreements regarding the issue of masah (wiping) over the feet are also based on this reason.

A. Dictionary and Terminological Meaning

The term masah (مسح) is derived from the root “m-s-h (م- س- ح)”. In the dictionary, it means “to touch something with a hand or another object”[1], “to move something over another thing”[2], “to move the hand over something to remove residue”[3], “to wipe away something that is flowing or smeared”[4], “to groom”[5] and “to apply water or oil with the hand”[6].

The terminological meaning of masah (wiping) is not different from its dictionary meaning.[7] In the Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), the term masah refers to the purification ritual performed by wiping with a wet hand over the head, neck and ears during ablution (wudu) or over leather socks or bandages as well as by wiping the face and arms with hands that have touched the soil during tayammum (dry ablution).[8]

B. Masah (Wiping) in the Quran and Hadiths

The word masah (wiping) appears in three places in the Quran.[9] In the Verse from Surah Sâd, Allah says:

رُدُّوهَا عَلَيَّ فَطَفِقَ مَسْحًا بِالسُّوقِ وَالْأَعْنَاقِ.

“He (Solomon) said, ‘Return them to me’ and began to stroke (perform masah over) their legs and necks with his hands”.[10]

In many dictionaries, based on this Verse, the term masah has also been interpreted to mean “to strike or sever the neck or a limb with a sword”[11], and thus, doing masah to the neck is said to mean “to strike or sever it”.[12] For all these meanings to be applicable, the word masah would need to be used alongside the sword. This is because to do masah with a sword metaphorically implies severing.[13] However, in this Verse, the word sword is not mentioned.

Another Verse in which the word masah is mentioned is in Surah An-Nisa:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَقْرَبُواْ الصَّلاَةَ وَأَنتُمْ سُكَارَى حَتَّىَ تَعْلَمُواْ مَا تَقُولُونَ وَلاَ جُنُبًا إِلاَّ عَابِرِي سَبِيلٍ حَتَّىَ تَغْتَسِلُواْ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاء أَحَدٌ مِّنكُم مِّن الْغَآئِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاء فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاء فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا.

“O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of impurity (janabah) -except those who are on a journey- until you have washed [your whole body]. If you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have had sexual contact with women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe (masah) your faces and hands with it. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Merciful.[14]

This Verse refers to ablution and mentions tayammum (dry ablution) for the first time, commanding that if water for ablution or ghusl (bathing) is not available, then the palms of the hand should be struck on a clean area of earth/surface and wiped over the face and hands.

The relevant Verse from Surah Al-Ma’idah is as follows:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلاةِ فاغْسِلُواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُواْ بِرُؤُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَينِ وَإِن كُنتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُواْ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاء أَحَدٌ مَّنكُم مِّنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاء فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاء فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم مِّنْهُ مَا يُرِيدُ اللّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَـكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهَّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ.

“O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over (masah) your heads and your feet to the ankles. If you are in a state of major impurity, then purify yourselves properly (wash your whole body). But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have had sexual contact with women and do not find water, then seek a clean part of earth/surface and wipe over (masah) your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to cause difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favour upon you that you may be grateful”.[15]

This Verse describes both ablution and ghusl (ritual purification) and reiterates that in situations where water cannot be found, one can perform tayammum (dry ablution). It concludes by stating that Allah does not intend to make things difficult for you but wants to purify you and complete His favour upon you.

Words derived from the root masah are used in Hadiths with meanings such as “touching”, “removing”, “wiping” and “applying”. For example, a narration from Bara’ b. Azib is as follows:

…فانتهيت إلى النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فحدثته فقال ابسط رجلك فبسطت رجلي فمسحها فكأنها لم أشتكها قط

“…I went to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and explained (my distress) to him. He said, “Extend your leg”. I extended my leg, and he wiped it (gently rubbed it). After that, I had no complaints about it”.[16]

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّ رَجُلًا شَكَا إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَسْوَةَ قَلْبِهِ فَقَالَ لَهُ إِنْ أَرَدْتَ تَلْيِينَ قَلْبِكَ فَأَطْعِمْ الْمِسْكِينَ وَامْسَحْ رَأْسَ الْيَتِيمِ.

A narration from Abu Hurairah is as follows: A man complained to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about the hardness of his heart. The Prophet told him, “If you want your heart to soften, feed the needy and wipe/stroke (masah) the head of an orphan”.[17]

As one can see, the term masah retains its dictionary meaning in narrations where it is mentioned alongside ra’s (head) and rijl (foot) outside of the context of ablution.

C. The Semantic Shift in the Word Masah

Regarding the concept of masah, when examining early period dictionaries, it is noted that the word’s meaning was assumed to be known for only different usages were provided. However, in later periods, the primary meaning was also given and increasingly detailed. Almost all the meanings the word has acquired over time are connected to its root meaning. As far as we can determine, the inclusion of interpretations related to washing the feet during ablution and the views of some linguists suggesting that the word masah could also mean washing in dictionaries occurred six centuries after the revelation of the Qur’an. These claims will be evaluated below.

Ibn al-Athir (d. 606/1210), in his work al-Nihaya[18], interprets the Hadith “he performed tamassuh and prayed (اِنَّهُ تَمَسَّحَ وَ صَلَّى)” by stating that tamassaha (performed masah) means tawadda (performed ablution / washed), thus suggesting that masah also carries the meaning of washing.[19] Tamassaha can be metaphorically used to mean “performed ablution”; however, it is problematic to derive the meaning of washing from masah based on this usage. In ablution, two organs are washed while two organs (the head and feet) are wiped. Therefore, it is natural for tamassaha to be used in the sense of tawadda (performed ablution). However, from tamassaha, the meaning “he performed ablution by washing his feet” cannot be derived. On the contrary, such an expression indicates that the feet are wiped during ablution. Because the verb tamassaha was used while discussing the issue of being led in prayer by someone who performs ablution by wiping over their shoes.[20] If the meaning of tamassaha in their minds was “to perform ablution by washing”, such a topic would not have been debated. Indeed, Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1201), in his work Ghareeb al-Hadith, which is thought to have been written before al-Nihaya, stated that tamassaha means tawadda (performed ablution), but did not indicate that masah means washing.[21] Ibn Manzur’s (d. 711/1311) reference to Ibn al-Athir’s above-mentioned view marks the first point of divergence in the dictionaries.

Abu Zayd’s (d. 215/830) assertion that the term masah can be used for someone who washed their hands with water and that tamassaha can be used for someone who washed himself[22] requires scrutiny. While washing sometimes involves wiping, masah never substitutes for washing. This is because when a person washes an organ with water and rubs it with their hands, they are performing masah. However, someone who performs masah cannot be washing. The expressions cited by Ibn Qutayba (d. 276/889) in his Gharib al-Hadith from Abu Zayd are as follows: “Do you not see that when you perform ablution for prayer, you say, ‘I performed tamassuh?’ Washing is called masah because to wash something is to cleanse it by pouring water over it, while masah is to cleanse by wiping with water. Therefore, masah is light washing”.[23] Although Abu Zayd considers masah as light washing, since there is no process of pouring water in masah, it cannot be considered washing. Therefore, the opinions attributed to Abu Zayd that “masah also means washing”, “washing is called masah” and “masah is light washing” contradict each other as well as his own definitions of washing and masah.

Ibn Qutayba based his view that “washing the feet in ablution is called masah” on Abu Zayd and considered the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) act of washing his hands, face and feet with a small amount of water during ablution as masah. He also supported himself with the opinion attributed to Ibrahim (al-Nakha’i) (d. 96/714), which stated that “performing masah on the face by applying water to it is considered both; washing and masah“.[24] First of all, in the information given about the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) ablution with a small amount of water, wiping the head is not mentioned. Although the actions performed here are expressed as masah, in reality, they are merely washing. Indeed, it is stated in the text that this is washing. Additionally, in the opinion attributed to Ibrahim, it is understood that the face is washed by the application of water, so expressing washing with the term masah might not cause confusion. However, since the Verse of ablution states, “wipe your heads and feet”, understanding the command “masah (wipe)” as wiping for the head but washing for the feet, and then, saying “what is meant by wiping the feet is actually washing them”, would not be consistent. This is because the organs to be washed are explicitly mentioned at the beginning of the Verse.

Firuzabadi (d. 817/1415) first presented Ibn Qutayba’s interpretation of the Prophet (peace be upon him) performing ablution with a small amount of water as if it were a Hadith, and then, based on this, he stated that what is meant by performing masah over the feet in the Verse is actually washing them. Moreover, he claimed that since the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) action clarifies this, the term masah is a common word that also includes the meaning of washing or that it is used literally for the head and metaphorically for the feet, thereby suggesting that masah could have two different meanings. His reasoning for saying this is based on his view that the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) action, which has reached us through solitary reports (Ahad Hadiths), cannot abrogate the Qur’an. Firuzabadi states that if this view is not accepted, the last resort would be to assume that the word “feet (اَرْجُلْ)” implies “wash in the sense of wipe”, which is an excessive stretch.[25] Firuzabadi’s explanations illustrate that the semantic shift, which entered the lexicon through Ibn Manzur, has deepened and taken on different dimensions over time.

III. THE PERSPECTIVE OF ISLAMIC SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ON MASAH (WIPING) OVER THE FEET

In the Hanafi School of Thought, washing the feet is obligatory.[26] It is stated that wiping over sandals, slippers or bare feet is not sufficient.[27] Their evidence for this includes narrations about washing the feet and Hadiths containing warnings about the heels. Regarding the relevant Verse, they prefer the fathah recitation (Qira’at) of arjul (feet) in connection with washing, interpreting it as including wiping. They argue that the kasrah recitation (Qira’at) is due to jewar (proximity) and to reconcile both recitations, they apply the kasrah recitation to wiping over footwear (khuffayn).[28]

In the Shafi’i School of Thought, washing the feet is also obligatory,[29] and they assert that there is consensus (ijma’) on this matter.[30] Their interpretation of the relevant Verse aligns with that of the Hanafi School.[31] They emphasise all narrations that pertain to washing the feet.[32]

In the Maliki School of Thought, washing the feet is also obligatory. The Maliki approach to the Qur’anic Verses and Hadiths is similar to that of Hanafi and Shafi’i Schools.[33] However, Ibn Rushd presents a unique perspective, arguing that the Hadiths warning about the heels are evidence for masah (wiping) rather than washing. He also highlights narrations from some Companions and Followers (Tabi’in) that indicate permissibility of masah. Despite this, he suggests that washing is more appropriate for cleanliness.[34]

The Hanbali School of Thought, like the other Sunni Schools, states that washing the feet during ablution is obligatory based on the same evidence.[35]

It is reported that the founder of the Zahiri School, Dawud b. Ali al-Isfahani, held the view of consolidation of washing and wiping. Other members of the Zahiri School, however, hold the opinion that washing the feet during ablution is obligatory. According to them, the Verse instructs the wiping (masah) of the feet, and setting a limit/boundary does not constitute evidence for washing. Nevertheless, the warning regarding the heels is considered to have abrogated both the Verse and the narrations concerning masah.[36]

The Zaidiyyah Sect, which is a moderate Shia Sect prevalent in Iraq, Tabaristan and predominantly Yemen, considers washing the feet as obligatory similar to Sunni Schools of Thought within Ahl al-Sunnah.

According to the Twelver Shia (Shiite-Imamiyyah) Sect, which is more prevalent in Iran, it is obligatory to perform masah over the feet during ablution (wudu). Washing the feet is permissible only in cases of taqiyya (dissimulation) or fear. If washing the feet is necessary for cleanliness, it should be done either before or after performing ablution. Except for the sandals or slippers worn by Arabs, which are called na’l, masah cannot be performed over anything else that prevents wiping over the bare feet.[37] According to them, the apparent meaning of the verse regarding the feet is wiping (masah), because the verse consists of two clauses: one containing the ruling of washing (the face and arms), and the other containing the ruling of wiping (the head and feet). Additionally, since the ruling of the noun introduced by the conjunction and the noun it is connected to cannot be different, the ruling for the head and the feet is the same. The Hadiths that align with the apparent meaning of the Qur’an are authentic; it is not permissible to abandon the ruling of masah based on solitary reports (Ahad Hadiths). The warning about the heels is due to the fact that Arabs who walked barefoot treated their cracked heels with urine. They interpret the words of Ali (RA)[38] after performing masah on his feet, “This is the ablution of someone who is already in a state of ablution”, to mean “This is the ablution of someone who has not invented anything new”. It is not appropriate to cling to various interpretations such as caution against the Verse.[39] The Sunnah does not abrogate the Qur’an; rather, the Qur’an abrogates the Sunnah. The statement narrated from Anas: “The Qur’an was revealed with masah (wiping), the Sunnah with washing”, refers to the practice of the Prophet (peace be upon him) before the revelation of the Verse. The widespread practice of washing despite the Verse became widespread due to administrative pressures. The words of Hajjaj and some narrations indicate this.[40]

IV. THE TREATMENT OF THE TOPIC IN TAFSIRS (COMMENTARIES)

Due to the fact that the word “arjul (ارجل)” in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah is read differently by the Qira’at scholars, either with a fathah (“a” sound) or with a kasrah (“e” sound), and thus the Verse is given different meanings, the topic has been addressed in Tafsirs (Qur’anic exegesis) within the context of Qira’at (recitation variants).

A. Rulings Derived from the Differences in Qira’at (Recitation Variants)

In the ablution Verse, the word “arjul (ارجل) / feet” comes after the phrase, “Wipe (masah) your heads” and is read in two mutawatir[41] (widely transmitted) recitations: “arjulakum (أَرْجُلَكُمْ)”  with a fathah[42] or “arjulikum (أَرْجُلِكُمْ)” with a kasrah[43]. According to this, the general consensus regarding the word arjul (feet) is as follows: those who read it with a fathah connect it to aydiya (hands), saying that the verb is ighsiloo (wash), and conclude that the feet must be washed. Those who read it with a kasrah connect it to ru’oos (heads), saying that the verb is imsahoo[44] (wipe) and prefer that the feet should be wiped. There is also a rare (shaadh) recitation[45] with a dammah (“u” sound) on this word. In this case, the word arjulukum becomes a mubtada (subject) with its khabar (predicate) omitted. According to the interpretation that favours washing, the meaning of the phrase is “Wash the feet up to the ankles”, and according to the interpretation that favours masah, it means “Wipe the feet up to the ankles”.[46]

In addition to these two well-known views, there are two other approaches: one is the combination of washing and wiping, and the other is the freedom to choose between washing or wiping. While the majority of Ahl al-Sunnah adheres to the view of washing, some groups, particularly the Imami Shia, accept the view of wiping. The combination view is attributed to some scholars, such as Dawud ibn Ali al-Isfahani and Nasir al-Haqq, whereas it is reported that Hasan al-Basri and Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310/923) preferred “the freedom of choice”.[47] However, Tabari’s view is not “the freedom of choice” as claimed but rather wiping the entire foot with water.[48]

B. Combining the Opposing Qira’at (Recitation Variants)

Based on the principle of combining opposing Qira’at, the different recitations (with fathah and kasrah) of the word “arjul (ارجل)” in the ablution Verse have been considered as rulings of two distinct Verses and combined accordingly.

Those who combine the recitations by taking the fathah as the basis and interpret the different Qira’at of “arjul (ارجل)” as the ruling of washing the feet, either interpret the kasrah recitation as implying a light washing or say that the word “arjul (ارجل)” is recited with a kasrah due to jewar (proximity), and thus, it refers to the limbs that are to be washed. According to them, the evidence for jewar (proximity) in the ablution Verse is the specification of limits/boundaries for the feet, as limits are set for washed organs, not for those that are wiped. The insertion of the phrase “wipe your heads” in between indicates either the order (in the Verse and practice) or the economical use of water.[49] Another view on combining the recitations (Qira’at) into the ruling of washing is that the kasrah recitation of “arjul (ارجل)” applies to the case when the feet are covered, and the fathah recitation applies when the feet are bare. Thus, if the feet are bare, they are washed, and if they are covered, they are wiped.

Those who base their interpretation on the kasrah recitation (Qira’at) and combine the recitations under the ruling of wiping the feet either consider the word “arjul (ارجل)” in the fathah recitation (Qira’at) to be linked to the position of the word ru’oos, in which case the ruling for the feet is still wiping[50], or they say that the letter waw (و) at the beginning of wa arjulikum comes for maiyya (accompaniment) and has the meaning of mea (with). Thus, the expression reads “wipe your heads along with your feet”.

C. The Evidence for Washing and Masah (Wiping)

The most significant basis for the view that washing the feet in ablution is obligatory comes from the narrations reporting that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) washed his feet during ablution and the alleged threatening warning to those who wipe their feet, “Woe to the heels from the Hellfire!”.[51] Their scriptural basis in the Verse is the phrase “up to the ankles” which sets a limit/boundary for the feet. According to them, this limit is set to eliminate the misconception that the feet are to be wiped.[52] Other bases include the principle of precaution[53] and the essence of cleanliness[54]. They argue that washing encompasses wiping and that the feet, being the most frequently soiled body part, need to be thoroughly cleaned.

The most important basis for the view that masah of the feet is obligatory (fardh) is the apparent meaning derived from the Verse.[55] This view is also supported by narrations related to masah. Additionally, several rational arguments are presented, such as the fact that the organs wiped during ablution are excluded during tayammum (dry ablution), and the act of masah over footwear suggests that bare feet should primarily be wiped.[56] It is also stated that washing the single organ (face) and the pair of organs (arms) forms a complete balance with the wiping of the single organ (head) and the pair of organs (feet).[57] Some even consider the Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) act of washing his feet not as obligatory but as a recommended (Sunnah) practice.[58]

D. The Opinions of the Commentators (Mufassir)

There is no information in the commentary (tafsir) of the early exegete (mufassir) Dahhak (d. 105/723) other than that the word arjul (ارجل) is read in two different recitations (Qira’at).[59] In the commentary of Muqatil ibn Suleiman (d. 150/767), the topic is not addressed.[60] Although it is said that al-Tabari’s (d. 310/923) view is “the freedom to choose”, a review of his tafsir reveals that his position is that the feet should be entirely wiped with water. Al-Maturidi (d. 333/944), in his Tafsir al-Qur’an, after mentioning that arjul was read with both fathah and kasrah, also rejects the view that “the feet should be washed if they are bare and they should be wiped if they are covered,” as he finds this view inconsistent, and deems it an unlikely opinion. He states that it is inappropriate to command both washing and wiping (masah) together. According to him, the kasrah recitation is due to jewar (proximity) and there are examples of this in the Quran. The wisdom behind commanding the washing of these organs is to remind the spiritual purity. Washing these organs has two meanings: one is to express gratitude for them, and the other is to erase the sins committed with them.[61]

When examining the tafsirs written by linguists, it is observed that Farra (d. 207/822) in his Maʿani al-Qur’an links the fathah recitation (Qira’at) of the word arjul to the word ru’oos. Farra reports that he received narrations indicating that Ibn Masʿud recited it with a fathah due to a word order change (taqdeem wa takheer); Ali stated, “The Book (Qur’an) was revealed with masah (wiping) and the Sunnah with washing”; and Sha’bi said, “Angel Gabriel (peace be upon him) revealed masah to Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and all the Prophets”. Farra, therefore, concludes by saying, “The Sunnah is to wash”.[62] Abu ʿUbaydah (d. 209/824) and Akhfash (d. 215/830) also mention that arjul is recited with a kasrah based on the vowel of the preceding word, implying that the meaning is “washing the feet”. Abu Ubaydah states that the evidence for this is the phrase “up to the ankles” in the Verse and the narrations that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) washed his feet.[63] Some Sunni commentators (mufassirs), such as Zajjaj (d. 311/923), al-Nahhas (d. 338/950), and Abu Hayyan (d. 745/1344) did not consider the practice of jewar (relying on the adjacent word for grammatical inflection) permissible in the Qur’an. However, Zajjaj stated that washing is intended since a limit/boundary is set for wiping the feet. According to al-Nahhas, the most suitable opinion on this matter is that both wiping and washing (masah) are obligatory. Abu Hayyan, on the other hand, believed that reciting the word arjul with a kasrah based on jewar is indeed a weak interpretation. Jewar applies only when there will be no ambiguity and only to adjectives.[64]

Tahawi (d. 321/933), who is one of the authors of the legal exegesis (Ahkam), mentions that there is a disagreement about the recitation and meaning of the word arjul (ارجل). After noting that there are narrations both supporting the rulings of washing and wiping, he states that he prefers the opinion of washing.[65] Jassas (d. 370/981) also discusses the differences in recitation (Qira’at) and potential meanings, explaining that the Verse is ambiguous (mujmal) and that the Hadith clarifies it. According to him, the intended meaning is washing, supported by widely known Hadiths about washing the feet and the idea that someone who washes their feet would not be criticized for not wiping them.[66] According to Ibn al-ʿArabi (d. 543/1148), although both recitations are correct from the perspective of the Arabic language and some Companions recited with a kasrah to imply wiping, the Sunnah requires washing. He argues that the insertion of a sentence in between indicates the explanation of the order, while the recitation with a kasrah is meant to show that it is possible to wipe over the items worn on the feet.[67] Qurtubi (d. 671/1273) states that masah (wiping) can also mean washing, and that the fathah recitation does not imply wiping in any way. He notes that there are many Hadiths regarding washing, so the recitation with a kasrah also means washing. He also points out that there is ijma’ (consensus) regarding washing, meaning that it is unanimously agreed that one who washes their feet has fulfilled the obligation, whereas there is disagreement concerning wiping.[68]

Zamakhshari (d. 538/1144) explains that the reason the feet, one of the three washed body parts, come after the heads is to avoid wasting water and to promote its economical use. He also states that setting a limit/boundary eliminates the notion that masah (wiping) could be intended.[69] Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606/1210), while acknowledging the impossibility of jewar (relying on the adjacent word for grammatical inflection), argues that it is more appropriate to link arjul to the nearby term, namely ru’oos (heads). He also asserts that it is not permissible to abrogate the Qurʾan with a singular Hadith (Khabar wahed), but due to the multitude of Hadiths about washing and the fact that washing includes wiping, caution is required, and specifying the limit/boundary is only applicable to washing.[70] Baydawi (d. 685/1286) states that the prevalent Sunnah, the practice of the Companions, and most of the school founders confirm that the recitation of arjul by connecting with the washed parts (i.e. feet) is correct. He then explains that reciting arjul with a kasrah is due to jewar (the grammatical concept of inflection based on the proximity).[71] Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1373) also notes that masah can mean a light form of washing. He suggests that the recitation with a kasrah might be either because of  jewar or applicable to the condition when the feet are covered.[72]

Among the recent commentators, Qasimi (d. 1332/1914) states that the apparent meaning of the Verse clearly indicates the obligation of masah. He suggests that the narrations (Hadiths) about washing express an addition and expansion in the obligation according to the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) practice. According to him, the legitimacy of masah (wiping) over socks and shoes also indicates that the obligatory act is wiping, because the basis of every act in Sunnah is found in the wording or meaning of The Book of Allah.[73] Rashid Ridha (d. 1354/1935) states that it is established by widely transmitted (mutawatir) Hadiths explaining the Qur’an that bare feet are to be washed, and covered feet are to be wiped. He notes that this is consistent with the wisdom of cleanliness, that there is no contradiction between the two recitations (Qira’at) and that those who initially preferred the recitation with a kasrah later reverted to the other recitation based on the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) clarification.[74] Elmalili Hamdi Yazir (1878-1942) states that considering masah of the feet permissible contradicts the wisdom of cleanliness mentioned at the end of the Verse, “Allah desires to purify you”.[75] Ibn ʿAshur (d. 1394/1973) also linked the necessity of washing the feet to the wisdom of cleanliness, stating that when approaching the presence of Allah, extra attention should be given to washing the part of the body that gets the dirtiest. Regarding the recitation with a kasrah, he considered the statement “The Qur’an was revealed with wiping (masah) and the Sunnah with washing” as the best interpretation and said, “The masah of the feet was abrogated by the Sunnah”.[76]

Süleyman Ateş states that the recitation (Qira’at) of arjul with a kasrah gives the meaning of “wipe your feet” and that deriving the meaning of washing from the fathah recitation does not appear consistent from the perspective of Arabic grammar. He emphasises the harmony and balance between washing one pair of organs and wiping another pair of organs in ablution, concluding that wiping the feet is obligatory. Ateş also finds the interpretations of Sunni scholars, who explain the Hadiths about wiping the feet as referring to “wiping over socks and khuffs or light washing” to be inconsistent, especially considering that wearing socks and sandals (khuffs) was not customary in a hot place like Medina. According to him, the Messenger of Allah did more than what was commanded in the Qur’an and, while not always, he often washed his feet. Ateş states that washing the feet in hot places relieves the body. He believes that by washing instead of just wiping, a better action is performed, fulfilling Allah’s command and making the ablution more perfect. He mentions that wiping the feet can suffice in circumstances like cold weather or water scarcity, but under normal conditions, washing the feet is more in line with the Sunnah.[77] Bayraktar Bayrakli, while accepting both the recitations (Qira’at) and meanings (washing and wiping), emphasises the application based on circumstances. For instance, if water is scarce, if there is a fungal infection on the feet or if it is difficult for working women to remove their socks to perform ablution, then wiping the feet is the most appropriate. However, if a person is not travelling and has enough water to wash their feet, they should wash their feet.[78]

Tabarsi (d. 548/1153) conveys the objections of Shi’a commentators to the Sunnis regarding the interpretation of wiping and washing. One objection is that “deriving the meaning of washing from the term masah is not feasible in some respects”, because the words for wiping and washing have different meanings, and thus, Allah’s separation of the organs to be washed and wiped is significant. Another objection is that due to the conjunction, the feet, like the head, should also be wiped. According to them, specifying a limit/boundary does not necessarily indicate washing; rather, it is possible to specify a limit/boundary for wiping as well. Tabarsi states that the use of jewar (proximity) in poetry, which is sometimes employed out of necessity, applies to adjectives not to conjuncts and only when there is no risk of causing ambiguity. He argues that Allah’s Book should not be based on such a weak interpretation. Tabarsi asserts that it is not permissible to deviate from the apparent meaning of the Qur’an, given the narrations that describe the Prophet (peace be upon him) washing his feet during ablution. He argues that these narrations do not hold conclusive knowledge but are speculative and contradict the narrations about masah. In this context, Tabarsi cites the following narration regarding the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) statement, “Those heels will drag one to the fire!”: “Bedouin Arabs used to urinate while standing, causing their urine to splash onto their heels and feet, and they would enter the mosque for prayer without washing their feet. The threat is about this behaviour”.[79] Tabatabaʿi (1904-1981) also mentions that the narrations from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt indicate that wiping the feet is required in ablution and that the narrations transmitted through Sunni sources contain different information, suggesting that they do not pertain to the interpretation of the Verse. He also describes the view that the terms masah (wiping) and ghasl (washing) have the same meaning as the weakest opinion on this matter. He claims that there is no connection between these two actions and that considering the wiping of the head while interpreting the wiping of the feet as washing is an unsupported choice.[80]

E. Evaluation of the Opinions on Washing and Wiping

  1. Evidence for the Opinion of Washing from the Verse: The Fathah Recitation (Qira’at) of Arjul

Proponents of the washing view, by preferring the fathah recitation of arjul (feet) have associated it with the washed organs, such as the aydiya (hands). They have argued that the reason for associating feet with hands is the fact that a limit/boundary is set for the feet “up to the ankles”, just as a limit/boundary is set for the hands that are washed “up to the elbows”.

a.      The Insertion of a Sentence Between Arjul and Aydiya

From a linguistic perspective, it is clear that associating a word with a distant term, when a similar term is nearby and a sentence is inserted between them, is not accurate.  Verses[81] from the Qur’an cited as evidence for the permissibility of this practice have been examined in detail, and it has been determined that this is not the case. Considering the reason for the insertion of a sentence between the noun introduced by the conjunction and the noun connected to it as an indication of order or light washing is also inconsistent. Abu Hayyan states that this is an inference made by the proponents of the washing view as there is no evidence in the Verse requiring order.[82] Indeed, according to Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik, order is not required when using waw (و) for conjunction. As for the view that lightly washing the feet -as if wiping them- is to avoid wasting water or to use it economically, this contradicts the opinion that “the feet are the most soiled organ and need to be washed”, as well as the Hadiths describing ablution, where the feet are washed three times.

b. Specifying the Limit/Boundary for the Feet

According to those who hold the view of washing, the justification for reciting the word arjul (ارجل) in the Verse with a fathah (indicating that it should be washed) and linking it to the “hands” is that, just as the command “wash your hands up to the elbows” specifies a limit, the same applies to the feet, specifying “up to the ankles”, thereby setting a boundary for wiping. Proponents of this view also use the fact that no limit/boundary is set for masah (wiping) in ablution and tayammum (dry ablution) as evidence. However, when the command to wash is given without specifying a limit, the general understanding is that the washing should be performed at least up to the ankles. This is similar to how in the Verses “cut off the hands of thieves”[83] and “cut off the hands and feet of the thieves respectively”[84], the limit/boundary is understood to be up to the wrists and ankles because no specific limit/boundary is mentioned.[85] Therefore, it is not required to specify a limit for understanding that the feet should be washed “up to the ankles”, and thus setting a limit cannot be used as evidence for their washing. The phrase “up to the elbows” about the hands is meant to indicate that the arms also need to be washed. As noted by al-Ṭabari, wiping includes either the entire organ or a part of it.[86] Therefore, in ablution, either the entire head or a part of it is wiped. If the command had been “wipe your feet” without specifying a limit, it would have been understood that either the entire foot or part of it should be wiped. Thus, the phrase “up to the ankles” clarifies the part of the foot to be wiped and indicates that the upper part of the foot is meant, not the lower part, since the ankles are located on the upper side of the foot. Indeed, there is consensus that wiping is done on the upper part of the foot. In tayammum, the face and hands are wiped. Since no limit is set for the hands, there are Hadiths indicating that wiping up to the elbows is acceptable, and there are also reports[87] suggesting that wiping up to the wrists is sufficient.

c.      The Reason for the Use of the Kasrah Recitation for Arjul Due to Jewar

The predominant view among those who support the washing of the feet is that the recitation of arjul with a kasrah is due to jewar meaning that the vowel was affected by the preceding word. Although some linguists consider jewar acceptable in the context of ablution Verses it can only be permissible in poetry under necessity, and if it does not create confusion when read with a kasrah. Moreover, jewar is used for adjectives, not for conjuncts.[88] The situation in the ablution Verse is different. The Word of Allah is free from the flawed method of jewar.[89] Indeed, it has been determined that in other Verses[90] used as evidence for this issue, the reason for the kasrah is not due to jewar[91]. Consequently, it is not appropriate to recite the word arjul (ارجل)  with a kasrah due to jewar, nor is it suitable to link it to the preceding command “wash”, regardless of which recitation is preferred. This is because two separate sentences with different meanings, “wash” and “wipe” have been established in the Verse.

d.      The Meaning of Masah as Washing or Wiping Over Leather Socks

As for interpreting the meaning of masah (wiping) in the kasrah recitation as washing, a terminological study has shown that this is not feasible from the perspectives of the Qur’an, Hadiths and dictionaries. If that were the case, the term masah would become a homonymous word. Even if masah were to metaphorically mean washing, within the context of the Verse, masah (wiping) has been distinguished from washing; the organs that are washed and those that are wiped have been assigned different rulings. The assertion that the verb masah in the Verse on ablution (wudu) is literal for the head but metaphorical for the feet involves combining both the literal and metaphorical meanings of a word in the same sentence, which is impossible.[92] Another opinion regarding reconciling the different recitations (Qira’at) in the ruling of washing states that the kasrah recitation of arjul (feet) applies to cases when the feet are covered, and the fathah recitation applies to cases when the feet are bare. However, there is no evidence in the Verse indicating this.

  1. The Evidence for the View of Masah (Wiping) from the Verse: The Kasrah Recitation (Qira’at) of Arjul

One of the well-known and mutawatir (widely transmitted) recitations of the word arjul in the Verse of ablution is the kasrah recitation. In this case, arjul is connected to the nearby kasrah word ru’us. In all Quranic verses where ‘masah’ (wiping) is used, it is always preceded by the preposition ‘bi.’ Moreover, in all verses except the one regarding feet, the second object of ‘masah’ has a kasrah vowel. Therefore, consistent with other instances, the second object in the ablution verse should also be recited with a kasrah vowel, reflecting the grammatical association with the first object.This is the correct approach from the perspective of the Arabic language.

  1. Other Bases for the Washing View
    a. The Cleanliness Rationale

The phrase in the ablution Verse, “Allah does not intend to cause difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you” is used to emphasise cleanliness and is taken as evidence that the feet should be washed. However, ablution (wudu) is a purification from ritual impurity (hadath), not from physical impurity (najasah). During ablution, clean body parts are usually washed or wiped. Therefore, the emphasis here is on spiritual cleanliness rather than physical cleanliness. If wiping the feet were meant to achieve physical cleanliness, it would be the bottom of the feet that would be wiped, not the top. Additionally, the thought that feet should be washed because they are the most frequently dirty part of the body, and thus, interpreting masah (wipe) in the Verse as “wash” is, as Anas ibn Malik said, contrary to Allah’s word. Since wiping the feet is not complete cleanliness, if the feet are dirty, they should indeed be washed. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) instructed a Companion helping him to take ablution and attempted to remove the Prophet’s shoes while performing it, “Leave them, for I put them on while my feet were clean[93]“. However, even if the feet are dirty, a person who wipes their feet during ablution is considered to have performed ablution, but any impurity (najasah) must still be removed.

b. The Principle of Precaution

Those who support the view of washing argue that washing the feet inherently fulfils the act of masah (wiping), thus advocating for precaution in religious practices. However, precaution, by its very nature, involves uncertainty and therefore cannot serve as evidence. There is nothing doubtful in The Book of Allah. Relying on precaution to interpret a clear Quranic verse can introduce ambiguity. This can lead to deviations from the explicit meaning of the verse based on reports that are not definitively established.

  1. Other Grounds for the Masah (Wiping) View
    a.The Exclusion of Wiped Organs in Ablution from Dry Ablution (Tayammum)

Those who support the view that the feet must be wiped primarily use the apparent meaning of the verse as evidence. Another piece of evidence they present is that the organs washed during ablution are wiped in tayammum (dry ablution). However, in our view, ablution involves washing and wiping certain organs, while ghusl involves washing the entire body, and tayammum serves as a substitute for both; thus, this argument is invalid.

b. Using Masah (Wiping) Over Footwear as Evidence for Masah Over Bare Feet

Another argument for the practice of masah (wiping) over the feet is  the view that states: “If wiping the feet were not obligatory, the ruling of wiping over socks and leather footwear (khuff) would not have been established.” Indeed, the permissibility of wiping over a turban or headscarf is due to the obligation of wiping the head itself. If the feet were an organ that must be washed, like the face and hands, then it would not be permissible to wipe over socks, slippers, shoes, etc. Washing cannot be replaced by anything else and therefore wiping over items covering the face and hands is not allowed. The wiping of washed organs is only applicable in the case of tayammum (dry ablution). Therefore, those who accept the practice of wiping over items worn on the feet should primarily accept the practice of wiping the bare feet.

5.      The Legal Ruling of the Ablution Verse Concerning the Feet

Even though the ruling of washing is derived from the fathah recitation (Qira’at) and the ruling of wiping is derived from the recitation with kasrah by scholars, the important aspect is the conclusion reached according to the adopted view. When examined from this perspective, the meaning of the relevant part of the Verse should be “wipe your heads and your feet”. This is because the word arjul (feet) is connected to ru’oos (heads), which appears in the kasrah recitation (genitive case), therefore, it should take the ruling of ru’oos. Whether arjul is read with the fathah recitation or not, the ruling remains the same as it can be attributed to the grammatical position (mahal) of ru’oos. However, linking a word to the grammatical position of a conjunct while disregarding the actual wording in the conjunction is also not appropriate. According to us, whether the term is recited with kasrah or fathah, only one ruling can be derived from the Verse: that is, the feet are to be wiped, linking them with the heads. Allah Almighty has detailed the obligations and rulings of ablution by saying, “O you who have believed, when you rise to prayer, wash your faces and your hands to the elbows, wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles”. In this Verse, the organs to be washed and wiped are specified separately, and the limits/boundaries for the arms and feet are also defined.

 

V. EXAMINATION OF WASHING AND MASAH (WIPING) HADITHS

In Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), the ruling that washing the feet is necessary during ablution is based more on the Hadiths than on the related Verse. Therefore, examining the Hadiths that form the core of this issue is of great importance.

A. Washing Narrations

When examining the narrations about washing the feet during ablution in the Hadith sources, it is observed that most of them describe the process of performing ablution. Some of these narrations describe how ablution should be performed. Some others both describe the ablution and suggest that the two units of prayer performed without any distraction after taking the ablution as described leads to the forgiveness of past sins. Additionally, some narrations describe that sins are washed away from the ablution organs and that on the Day of Judgment, the foreheads and feet of those who performed ablution will shine. Another group of narrations pertains to the issues of performing ablution, such as the need to ensure that water reaches between the fingers, and the requirement to repeat the ablution and prayer if there is a dry spot, such as a nail-sized area, left on the foot. The narrations which describe the ablution, are generally transmitted by well-known companions such as Abdullah ibn Zaid, Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib and Ibn Abbas.

Narrations transmitted from Abdullah ibn Zaid[94] are accounts of how Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) performed ablution. In these narrations, the feet are washed. Among them, a noteworthy account is from Abbâd ibn Tamim, the son of Abdullah ibn Zaid’s brother, who reported that his father or uncle narrated that the Prophet performed masah on his feet.

According to the reports[95] transmitted from Uthman ibn Affan (ra), he performed ablution as he had seen the Prophet (peace be upon him) do, and in most reports, he washed his feet three times. It has been observed that the problematic part is the statement found at the end of most of these reports, which is said to be transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) by Uthman, saying: “Whoever performs ablution as I have done, prays two units of prayer and does not talk during the prayer, his past sins will be forgiven”. This is problematic because it is impossible to pray without thinking of something, and it has been found that there are authentic reports associated with Verses stating that those who perform ablution and pray “as prescribed by Allah”  will have their sins -except for major sins- between obligatory prayers forgiven.

In the narrations[96] reported from Ali ibn Abi Talib (peace be upon him), he performed ablution to demonstrate the Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) method of ablution. In some of these narrations, he washed his feet three times during ablution. In others, he performed ablution by wiping over his feet. There are reports where he stated, “Had I not seen the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) wiping over the tops of his feet, I would have thought that wiping the soles (of the feet) would be more correct”. There are also narrations where he said, “This is the ablution of one who is in a state of ablution”. In the reports mentioning that Ali performed ablution by wiping, there is a comment noting, “People do not like to drink water while standing, but I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) do this” is similar to the explanation regarding wiping the upper part of the foot, which is considered permissible as seen in practice. Thus, such narrations are more consistent. We can also say that the phrase, “This is the ablution (wudu) of one who is already in a state of ablution” is inconsistent in other aspects. In some narrations, it is mentioned after wiping the face, arms, head and feet, while in others, it is mentioned after wiping only the feet. There is some confusion here. Additionally, a person who is already in a state of ablution does not need to perform it again. Furthermore, narrations that mention Ali (ra) wiping his sandals after urinating contradict the view that wiping the feet is only permissible when already in a state of ablution.

The Hadiths[97] narrated from Ibn Abbas about seeing the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) washing his feet along with his sandals are more appropriately attributed to Ali (ra). This is because most of the narrations attributed to Ibn Abbas are known to actually belong to other companions. These narrations, in terms of their subject, closely resemble those coming from Ali (ra).

In the Hadiths[98] narrated from Abdullah as-Sunabihi, which mention that sins are removed from the washed and wiped body parts during ablution, it is stated that the feet are washed. Since the removal of sins is not exclusive to the washed body parts in these narrations, it is not accurate to establish a connection between washing the feet and the removal of sins. The narrations[99] related to this topic from Amr b. Abasa and Abu Umamah are similar.

In the narrations[100] from Abu Hurairah, where he took ablution by washing his arms up to his shoulders and his feet up to his knees, and then reported from our Prophet (peace be upon him) saying that, “On the Day of Resurrection, your foreheads and feet will shine due to your ablution. Whoever wants to extend their radiance should do so”, is not appropriate to establish a connection between the washing of the feet and the radiance. This is because the phrases, “taking ablution properly” and “the marks of ablution”, mentioned in these narrations are general. Even though the entire face and arms are washed, it is only stated that the forehead and feet will shine. Additionally, in another narration[101] from Abu Hurairah, it is mentioned that the Ummah will be recognised in the Hereafter by the radiance on their foreheads and feet due to their ablution.

Regarding the narrations[102] about interlacing the fingers and that if they are not interlaced, the fire will interlace them: The word asaabi’ mentioned there is the plural form of words like esba’, usbu etc., which mean finger. The verb form is sabea’ which, in the dictionary, has meanings such as “to point at someone being gossiped about with a finger, to insert a finger into something, to touch with a finger, to probe with a finger and to indicate something with a finger”.[103]  In the Qur’an, the word asaabi’ appears in two places[104] and is used to mean “fingers of the hand”. The primary meaning of this word is the fingers of the hand. For it to mean toes, there needs to be contextual evidence. In the narrations from Ibn Abi Shaybah, including those from Ibn Mas’ud, Hudhayfah, Hasan and Abu Bakr, the phrase, “the fire will interlace the fingers that are not interlaced” does not indicate anything about the feet. The expression attributed to Umar, where he tells a group of people performing ablution to interlace their fingers, is also of this nature.[105] In Tabari’s account, the phrase regarding Ibn Umar, “After removing his shoes and washing his feet, he would interlace his fingers” is stated in the Hadith sources as “After removing his shoes, he would interlace his fingers”.[106] The narration from Ibn Abbas, where the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “When you rise for prayer, perform your ablution correctly and make sure to let the water pass between your fingers and toes” is considered weak.[107] Similarly, the narration from Mustawrid ibn Shaddad, “I saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) rubbing his toes with his little finger while performing ablution”[108] is also considered weak.

In Tabari’s account, it is narrated from al-Mughirah ibn Hanin that the Prophet (peace be upon him), upon seeing someone washing their feet while performing ablution, said: “I was commanded to do so”.[109] However, this narration has not been found in Hadith sources. Even if such narrations are authentic, if the Prophet (peace be upon him) was washing his feet by Allah’s command, it must pertain to a period before the relevant Verse was revealed and does not preclude wiping the feet. Additionally, there is no specific command in the Hadiths to wash the feet. There is only a narration where the Prophet (peace be upon him) instructed a blind man, “Wash the soles of your feet”.[110] This command might have been given to ensure the blind man washed away dirt or something that might have stuck to the bottom of his feet.

The narration[111] from Abu Dhar states, “While we were performing ablution, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw us from his house and said, “Woe to the heels from the Fire”. So we started rubbing and washing our feet”. If this narration is correct, it can be understood that they were not washing their feet but wiping over them before this warning. Regarding the narration[112] from Abu Umamah, “When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said three times, ‘Woe to the heels from the Fire’, there was no one in the masjid who did not turn their heels and look at them”, it has not been found in the Hadith sources.

Among the companions, the only one besides Ibn Mas’ud and in one narration, Ibn Abbas, who is reported to have recited the word arjul with a fatha is Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). There is a narration in some tafsir books where Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) hears Hasan and Husayn reciting the Verse as arjulikum and says, “It should be arjulakum; this is because of the word order change (taqdeem wa takheer) in the sentence”. However, this narration[113] has not been found in Hadith sources.

The narrations about Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) seeing a man who had a dry spot the size of a fingernail on his foot, ordering him to redo his ablution and prayer (after finishing his prayer) or saying, “Go back and perform your ablution properly”, after which the man went back and prayed again, may have used the word wudu[114] in the sense of ghusl (full ritual purification). This is because there are similar narrations related to ghusl.[115] However, the narrations from Anas and some other companions conveying this meaning have been considered weak.[116]

The narration[117] from Abdullah ibn Amr which describes the Prophet (peace be upon him) washing his face and arms three times, wiping his head, and then washing his feet three times, and saying, “This is how ablution is performed. Whoever adds to or subtracts from this has sinned and committed wrongdoing.” is considered weak; both in terms of its chain of transmission and its content.[118] This is because the ablution is still valid even if the organs are washed once or twice during ablution.

The narration[119] cited by Kasani in his work Bada’i’ al-Sana’i’, where the Prophet (peace be upon him) performed ablution by washing each part once, washed his feet, and said, “This is the ablution without which Allah will not accept the prayer”, contains the phrase “washed his feet”, which is not found in the primary Hadith sources.

B. Masah (Wiping) Over the Feet

The narrations regarding the masah of the feet in ablution are reported from companions such as Uthman, Ali, Anas ibn Malik, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar, Aws ibn Abi Aws, Rifa’a ibn Rafi’, Hudhayfah and Tamim al-Mazini. The Hadiths containing warnings about the heels will also be considered alongside the masah narrations.

When Uthman, during his caliphate, performed ablution by wiping his head and feet, and this was confirmed[120] by the companions, it indicates that wiping the feet was practised during that period.

When Hajjaj (d. 95/714), in a sermon in Ahwaz, spoke about ablution, he said: “There is no part of the body that gets dirtier than the feet. Therefore, wash the soles, tops and heels of your feet”. When Anas b. Malik heard this, he said, “Allah has spoken the truth, but Hajjaj is lying”, and he recited the word arjul (ارجل) with a kasrah (genitive case), meaning “Wipe your heads and feet”. The narrator mentioned that when Anas wiped his feet, he wetted them.[121] In another narration, Anas ibn Malik is reported to have said, “The Quran was revealed with wiping. The Sunnah brought washing / even though the Sunnah was washing”.[122]

It is also narrated from Ibn Abbas that ablution consists of washing two parts and wiping two parts. Another narration from him states: “People insist on washing their feet, but I find only wiping (masah) in the Book of Allah”.[123] From Ibn Abbas’ view on masah, it is understood that he did not see the Prophet (peace be upon him) performing ablution and based his opinion on the Verse. He likely made this statement in response to people’s insistence on making things difficult. Those who say that Ibn Abbas recited the word arjul in the Verse with a kasrah (genitive case) to derive the meaning of masah (wiping) and changed to a fathah (accusative case) upon learning of the warning about the heels, are -unknowingly- accepting that the correct recitation should be with a kasrah and that the recitation (Qira’at) with a fathah emerged later.

In the Hadith[124] of Rifaa ibn Rafi, the act of performing ablution thoroughly (isbaghu’l-wudu’ / properly washing and wiping the organs) is described as washing the face and arms and wiping the head and feet, as commanded by Allah. This is consistent with the Book of Allah.

In the narrations[125] of Aws ibn Abi Aws, the Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have wiped over his sandals (na’layn) or his feet while wearing sandals. This is considered one of the narrations about wiping because a na’l is a type of sandal or footwear that leaves parts of the feet exposed and does not reach the ankles.[126] Therefore, wiping over the sandals also involves wiping the feet. Additionally, there are authentic narrations[127] from Ibn Umar, stating that he saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) performing ablution while wearing sandals and that he himself also did the same.

Qatada also expressed his view on the Verse about ablution by saying, “Allah has made two washings and two wipings obligatory”.[128] Additionally, it has been reported that Ikrima said, “There is no mention of washing the feet. What is revealed about them is wiping”.[129] From Abu Jaʿfar, the view has been reported as “Wipe over your head and feet”.[130] The reports from Shaʿbi are as follows: “Angel Gabriel  brought the wiping” and “Do you not see that tayammum is the wiping of what has been washed and the abandonment of what has been wiped”.[131]

The narrations that include warnings about the heels are hadiths that caution the companions who performed ablution by wiping their feet, emphasising the necessity of performing ablution properly. These narrations come from Abdullah ibn Amr, Abu Hurayrah, Aisha, Jabir ibn Abdullah, Abdullah ibn Harith, Muaykib, Abu Dharr, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Shurahbil, Amr ibn al-As, Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan, and Abu Umamah and his brother.

According to the narration[132] of Abdullah ibn Amr regarding the Hadiths that contain warnings about the heels, the incident occurred while returning from Mecca to Medina. Since Abdullah ibn Amr came to Medina with his father after the 7th year of Hijra, this incident must have occurred during the return from the Farewell Pilgrimage, not during Umrah al-Qada (the lesser pilgrimage). This was after the revelation of Surah Al-Ma’idah. During this journey, the feet were wiped during ablution. It is believed that since the narrations mention that the ablution was performed hastily, they emphasise the need for proper ablution and attention to any impurities that might be on the heels. The fact that washing the feet was not commanded while issuing the warning indicates that washing the feet during ablution is not necessary. The Prophet’s (peace be upon him) statement, “Woe to the heels from the Fire”, mentioned in these narrations, has been interpreted by the majority as indicating that the feet are an organ that should be washed. However, this interpretation is not consistent. This is not a narration that commands washing, but rather one that has been interpreted as such. If washing had been obligatory, the command would have been, “wash your feet”. However, it is clear that the issue is not related to this. Additionally, this interpretation would imply that the companions had not yet understood the proper way to perform ablution, which is illogical. It is unreasonable to think that the companions were unaware of this matter.

It is narrated from Jabir ibn Abdullah that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Woe to the heels from the Fire”.[133] According to some of these narrations, this was said to a man who had a spot the size of a dirham on his foot that had not been washed or whose heels had not been touched by water. These narrations do not mention washing the feet, only issuing a warning concerning the heels.

It is narrated[134] from Abu Hurayrah and Aisha: “Perform your ablution completely, for I heard the Messenger of Allah say, -Woe to the heels from the Fire-“. As understood from these related narrations, Abu Hurayrah and Aisha cited the Prophet’s warning about the heels as a reason for completing ablution properly. However, over time, these words have been used as evidence for the necessity of washing the feet.

C. Comparison of the Narrations on Washing and Wiping (Masah)

There are authentic narrations regarding both the washing and the masah of the feet. It is claimed that the narrations about wiping are fewer in number and rare compared to those about washing. Since Surah Al-Ma’idah is one of the last revealed Surahs and there was less need to ask questions while the Verse was present, it is natural that there are fewer narrations about wiping. Additionally, the fact that washing includes wiping and reasons such as the feet being dirty may explain why there are more narrations about washing than wiping. However, it is also evident that the narrations about wiping over socks and leather boots (khuffayn) are numerous and considered valid narrations of masah.

There are many reports of the Messenger of Allah performing masah over his turbans, socks, sandals and shoes. For example, it is narrated from Ja’far ibn Amr who transmitted from his father (Ummayyeh al-Damri) who said: “I saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) wiping over his turban and khuffayn”.[135] Mughira ibn Shu’ba also reported that the Prophet (peace be upon him) performed ablution after urinating and wiped over his socks and sandals.[136] The greater number of narrations about wiping over footwear compared to those about wiping directly on bare feet stems from the difficulty of deriving the rule that wiping can be done over footwear from the apparent meaning of the Verse. Although the Verse does not explicitly mention wiping over footwear, the permissibility of wiping over such items arises from the linguistic meaning of masah. Since wiping is not washing, it can be performed on the organ itself or anything on it.

VI. EVALUATION FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE QUR’AN AND SUNNAH RELATIONSHIP

The Qur’an, being the primary source to be consulted for clarifying any matter, necessitates that a specific method be followed for its understanding. This involves a holistic approach in evaluating a Verse alongside other related Verses (Qur’an) and determining the correct rulings, which are considered wisdom (hikmah). The Prophet (peace be upon him), who is the best example for his community, conveyed and practised the Hadiths, each of which embodies wisdom. His adherence to the Qur’an requires that the Verses and Hadiths on a specific issue be considered together rather than separately, making it impossible for a Verse to state one thing and a Hadith to state something different. However, this principle has sometimes been overlooked, leading to differing opinions regarding the correct practice concerning the feet during ablution, as there are seemingly contradictory narrations. Those who advocate for washing have considered the Hadiths about wiping as rare (shadh) and have provided interpretations of the Verse that do not align with the Arabic rules. On the other hand, those who support the wiping view have not taken into account the Hadiths about washing and wiping over footwear, arguing that “it is not permissible to depart from the apparent meaning of the Verse based on solitary reports (Ahad Hadiths)”.

A.    The Relationship Between Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah and Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa

To accurately evaluate Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, it is necessary to establish its relationship with the similar Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa. Specifically, questions such as whether Verse 6 of Al-Ma’idah is a Verse about ablution (wudu) or dry ablution (tayammum), and which Verse was revealed earlier or later, need to be addressed. Additionally, considering whether abrogation (naskh) is relevant to the issues of ablution and dry ablution (tayammum) will contribute to a better understanding of the subject.

  1. Is Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, a Verse About Tayammum (Dry Ablution)?

In tafsirs (exegeses), Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah is often referred to as the Verse about tayammum (dry ablution). This Verse describes ablution in detail and reiterates both ghusl (full-body ritual purification bath) and tayammum. In its similar counterpart, Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa, while ghusl and tayammum are described, ablution is only alluded to with the phrase “If one of you comes from the toilet and does not find water …”. This is because the actions performed in the toilet invalidate ablution. The Verse explains what invalidates ablution and ghusl, and how tayammum should be performed if water is unavailable. This situation indicates that ablution (wudu) already existed before and that it was performed before prayer. The event cited as the basis for the legitimacy of tayammum (dry ablution) occurred during the return from the Banu Mustaliq expedition, which was in the 5th year of the Hijrah.[137] The revelation of Surah Al-Ma’idah, however, was no earlier than after the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, which occurred towards the end of the 6th year of the Hijrah. Therefore, the Verse in Surah An-Nisa was revealed before the Verse in Surah Al-Ma’idah.

Surah Al-Ma’idah, in terms of its topics, serves as a complement to the preceding Surah An-Nisa.[138] This also applies to the Verse 43 of An-Nisa and Verse 6 of Al-Ma’idah. Both the Verses discuss the purification required for prayer. The fact that the Verse in Surah Al-Ma’idah provides detailed information about ablution and reiterates tayammum, followed by mentioning the completion of favour upon Muslims, clearly indicates that this Verse was revealed later. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider that the Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa, where tayammum is mentioned for the first time, is the tayammum Verse.

  1. Has Abrogation (Naskh) Occurred in Ablution (Wudu’) and Dry Ablution (Tayammum)?

The Verses in the Qur’an are revealed in a manner that includes both similar (mutashabihat) and paired (mathani) Verses; the explicit (muhkam) Verses are explained in detail by the similar (mutashabih) ones. To understand any topic in the Qur’an, the explicit and similar Verses are brought together to form a cohesive understanding and to obtain detailed information.[139] Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah and Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa are similar (mutashabih) Verses. Among these, the Verse in Surah An-Nisa is explicit regarding both ablution (wudu) and dry ablution (tayammum). This Verse refers only to ablution indirectly, as it commands those who do not have water to perform tayammum. Therefore, it is understood that ablution was practised according to the earlier Sharia as established by the Prophet (peace be upon him), and tayammum was first introduced in this Surah.

Verse 106 of Surah Al-Baqarah states, “We do not abrogate a Verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth one better than it or similar to it…” This indicates how abrogation (naskh) of an existing or forgotten Verse occurs. Allah’s final Book was revealed to replace the previous ones. Allah excluded some of the rulings in the earlier Scriptures from His final Book, replaced some rulings with better ones and transmitted a large portion exactly as they were.[140] According to this, the Verse in Surah An-Nisa’ does not provide a detailed explanation of ablution but only alludes to it, and therefore, it constitutes an abrogation of previous laws by replacing them with a similar ruling. Since  Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah provides a detailed explanation about ablution, it shows that this Verse abrogates the Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa with a more comprehensive ruling, indicating that the ruling on ablution has been made more lenient.

As it is well known, the obligation and method of performing ablution (wudu) were known and practised through the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) before the relevant Verses were revealed. The Prophet’s (peace be upon him) practice of ablution was based on the practices of previous Prophets[141], and he was likely taught this knowledge  by  Angel Gabriel  (peace be upon him).[142] Therefore, he (peace be upon him) used to wash his feet during ablution in accordance with the Sharia of those who came before him.

The Noble Qur’an was revealed as a confirmation[143] of the previous Scriptures. From the statements[144] found in the Torah, it is understood that a practice similar to ablution in Islam had existed before the revelation of the Quran.

An important indicator of the abrogation in ablution (wudu) mentioned in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah is the phrase at the end of the Verse: “Allah does not intend to cause difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favour upon you so that you may be grateful”. Allah does not want to cause hardship for His servants, and thus, He has prescribed tayammum (dry ablution) in certain necessary situations. The allowance for wiping (masah) over the feet instead of washing them is also considered a facilitation. The fact that ablution involves purification from ritual impurity and that tayammum is also regarded as a purifying act indicates that Allah’s intent for ease and cleanliness applies to both ablution and tayammum.

For the completion of favour, a new ruling must be introduced, meaning it must be abrogated with a better one. This applies to ablution rather than tayammum because there has been no change in the practice of tayammum as mentioned earlier in Surah An-Nisa, but the practice of washing the feet in ablution has been changed to masah (wiping) over them. Moreover, the fact that ablution is only a condition for prayer and is not required for other acts of worship or actions is another aspect of the completion of favour.

B.     The Relationship Between Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah and the Related Hadiths

There are both washing and wiping (masah) Hadiths related to ablution. Since Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah commands the wiping of the feet, there must have been washing before the Verse was abrogated by something better, that is, wiping. Considering Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah and the related Hadiths together, the Hadiths about wiping the feet must pertain to the period after the revelation of this Verse. Some narrations indicating that wiping occurred after the revelation of Surah Al-Ma’idah support this view. In this case, the integrity of the Qur’an and Sunnah is maintained, neither is an inaccurate interpretation given to the Verse as “wash your feet” nor are the Hadiths about washing and wiping disregarded.

It is asserted that the Verse was revealed with the command of masah (wiping), and the Sunnah introduced washing. Since it is accepted that ablution has been practised since the beginning of Islam, it cannot be said that the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Sunnah related to washing came after the revelation of Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah. However, it is possible that feet were washed for some reason even after the revelation of the relevant Verse. Therefore, washing the feet in ablution could have occurred both before and after the Verse was revealed. What is important here is that the Hadiths about wiping pertain to the period after the revelation of the Verse. The narration from Abdullah ibn Amr indicates that wiping the feet occurred after the revelation of Surah Al-Ma’idah. There are also reports that during his Caliphate, Uthman wiped his feet. Other relevant narrations are as follows:

It is narrated from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) that she said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) continued to perform masah until he met Allah after Surah Al-Ma’idah was revealed”.[145]

It is narrated from Jarir ibn Abdullah al-Bajali that he said: “I became a Muslim after Surah Al-Ma’idah was revealed. I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) performing masah after I became a Muslim”.[146] The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) performed masah on his khuffayn (leather socks) after Surah Al-Ma’idah was revealed.[147]

These two narrations referring to Surah Al-Ma’idah are significant. This is because the primary basis for considering the feet as body parts for masah and the permissibility of wiping over leather socks (khuffayn) is rooted in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah. The expression found in some versions of the narration, “Did you become Muslim before or after Surah Al-Ma’idah?” also alludes to this. Before the revelation of the Verse concerning ablution, feet were only washed according to the previous Sharia. The reason for asking such a question is likely related to this matter. In truth, every practice in Sunnah has a foundation in the Book of Allah, either explicitly or implicitly.

Miqdam bin Shurayh narrated from his father: “I asked Aisha about masah over the leather socks (khuffayn). She said, ‘Go to Ali, for he used to travel with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).’ So, I went to Ali and asked him. He said, ‘We used to travel with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and he would command us to wipe over our khuffayn‘”.[148]

Awf bin Malik al-Ashja’i narrated: “The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) commanded us during the Battle of Tabuk that for a traveller, wiping over the leather socks (khuffayn) is permitted for three days and three nights, and for a resident, for one day and one night”.[149]

Sulaiman b. Buraida narrated from his father who said: “On the Day of the Conquest, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) performed ablution and wiped over his leather socks (khuffayn). Thereupon, Omar said to him, ‘O Messenger of Allah, today I saw you doing something you had not done before’. The Prophet replied, ‘O Omar, I did it deliberately’”.[150]

VII. CONCLUSION

The word masah in dictionaries means to touch, to rub, to pass something over something else, to wipe away something flowing or smeared, to apply water or oil with the hand, etc. The inclusion of the view in dictionaries that the term masah in the context of ablution could indirectly mean “light washing” alongside its primary meaning, based on some legal interpretations and opinions of some linguists, appears to have occurred approximately six centuries after the decease of the Messenger Muhammad (peace be upon him). In the Qur’an and Hadiths, masah is not used in the sense of washing.

The issue of washing or masah of the feet during ablution is generally addressed in the context of recitation (Qira’at) in tafsirs (exegeses). According to the commentators (mufassirs), the recitation of arjul with fathah (accusative case) indicates washing, while the recitation with kasrah (genitive case) indicates wiping. Additionally, there are two other views: one combines washing and wiping and the other one allows for a choice between washing or wiping.

Those who support the view of washing the feet base their preference on authentic Hadiths about washing and warnings related to the heels. They favour the recitation of arjul with fathah, linking it to aydiya (hands) and argue that the reason for the kasrah recitation is due to jewar (proximity). Some have said that the kasrah recitation implies either washing or wiping over footwear. They have cited the specification of a limit/boundary for the feet in the Verse as a justification that the phrase means “to wash the feet”. They interpret the phrase, “Wipe your heads” coming in between as referring to the order of cleaning or the economical use of water. Additionally, they argue that washing is more appropriate from a cleanliness perspective,  and because washing also encompasses wiping, suggesting that washing is more prudent.

Those who hold the view of masah state that, according to the rules of the Arabic language, the recitation of arjul with a kasrah should be preferred, linking it to ru’oos (heads). They also argue that the recitation with a fathah can refer to the position of ru’oos and support their view with Hadiths that mention masah. They cite as evidence the fact that the organs wiped in ablution are omitted in tayammum (dry ablution), and the permissibility of wiping over footwear implies that wiping over bare feet should be considered permissible.

The recitation of the word arjul with a fathah linking it to aydiya (hands) -thereby introducing a new legal ruling in between- and the recitation of arjul with a kasrah due to jewar are not appropriate according to the rules of the Arabic language. The examples from the Verses and the interpretations provided by those who support the view of washing have not been found accurate in this regard. As for specifying a boundary for the feet, it cannot be a justification for interpreting the Verse as referring to washing because specifying a boundary can also apply to wiping. Therefore, the ruling regarding the feet in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah is that they should be wiped.

Although the Verse about ablution commands the wiping of feet, the presence of narrations about washing and warnings about the heels has made it seem as though there is a conflict between the Verse and Hadiths. To resolve this, proponents of washing have suggested that the Sunnah introduced washing, thus interpreting the Verse as “Wash your feet”. This view has dominated the majority of the Islamic world. However, it becomes evident that the ablution and tayammum described in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah are also present in Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa if the relationship between the Verses is considered. In Verse 43 of Surah An-Nisa, tayammum is explicitly described, while ablution is mentioned implicitly. In subsequently revealed Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, ablution is detailed, and tayammum is repeated. Therefore, it can be inferred that the Prophet (peace be upon him) initially performed and taught ablution by washing the feet according to the previous Sharia, which was then abrogated by the easier command of wiping in Surah Al-Ma’idah. Since the Verse commands the wiping of the feet, the prior practice must have involved the more difficult task of washing. Thus, there is no conflict between the authentic narrations of washing and wiping. The ruling about the feet during ablution was washing before the revelation of the Verse and wiping after it. It is natural for narrations about both practices to exist. Reports indicating that wiping was practiced after the revelation of Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah further support this conclusion.

While Sunni Schools of Thought and the Zaidiyyah Sect of Shia Islam adopt the view of washing, the Imamiyyah Sect of Shia Islam adheres to the view of masah (wiping). In fact, all sects in some way converge on the view of masah. This is because Sunni Scholars allow masah over socks, leather socks (khuffs) and shoes under certain conditions, while the Imamiyyah Sect accepts masah over bare feet. Since there is no disagreement on the matter of masah (despite the differences in its form), the notion that feet must necessarily be washed is logically incorrect. Additionally, stating that the feet are not organs for wiping, yet saying that wiping over socks (khuffs) is permissible, is a clear contradiction. As known, the majority of scholars in the Sunni Schools of Thought hold the view that wiping over bare feet is not allowed. According to them, only wiping over leather socks (khuffs) is permissible. However, this is not a consistent understanding. Just as there is no need for anything on our heads while wiping over them, there is similarly no need for anything on our feet while wiping over them. Furthermore, to say that wiping over bare feet is not allowed implies that wiping over a bare head is also not allowed, which is clearly not the case. Saying that wiping over bare feet is not allowed also implies that wiping over leather socks (khuffs) is not allowed either. There are indications that the transformation of wiping the feet into washing in ablution has historical and political background, particularly due to administrative pressures during the Umayyad period.

From the perspective of the coherence between the Qur’an and Sunnah, it can be understood that the act of wiping (masah) over the feet mentioned in Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, abrogated the previous practice of washing them. Before the revelation of this Verse, the feet were washed during ablution, but afterwards, they were wiped. The phrase at the end of the Verse, “Allah does not intend to cause difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favour upon you so that you may be grateful”, aligns with this change. The completion of the favour refers to the introduction of an ease that was not previously present, which is the permission to perform masah over the feet.

Islam being a religion based on fitrah, which is the natural laws of creation, means that Allah’s message is universally applicable at all times and places. This ensures that the system it establishes can be easily implemented by all people and that it fosters harmony between nature and human beings. The fundamental principle of, “There is no hardship in religion” is emphasised in the Verse regarding ablution, and every possible ease has been provided for this practice, which is a condition for performing prayer. This undoubtedly provides a convenience for Muslims, as washing the feet is not as easy or feasible for everyone under all circumstances as it might be assumed.

In conclusion, a person who wipes their feet, whether bare or covered, while performing ablution does fully comply with both the Verse and Hadiths. Although rubbing the feet by hand while washing them includes the act of wiping, if a person believes that Allah’s command is to wipe, they should wipe their feet. Additionally, wiping the feet is a convenience provided not by us but by Allah to His servants, and it is not limited to situations of necessity. If the commentators (mufassirs) and jurists (fuqaha) had understood the narrations in the light of the Qur’anic Verses, there would have been no disagreement, and the correct ruling would have been reached.

Translated by NEZIHA KAYA

[1] Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Azdi al-Basri Ibn Duraid, Jamharat al-Lugha, 3 volumes, Beirut, Dar Sader, ‘n.d.’, Vol. II, p. 156.

[2] Abu’l-Husayn Ahmed ibn Faris, Mu’jam Maqayis al-Lughah, edited by Abd al-Salam Muhammad Harun, 6 volumes, 2nd edition, Cairo, Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi and Sons, 1972, Vol: V, p. 322.

[3] Raghib al-Isfahani, Mufradat, edited by Safwan Adnan Dawudi, 3rd edition, Beirut, Dar al-Shamiyyah, 2002, p. 767.

[4] Abu’l-Hasan Ali ibn Ismail Ibn Sidah, Al-Muhkam wa al-Muhit al-A’zam, edited by Aisha Abdurrahman bint al-Shati’, 12 volumes, Cairo, Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization, Institute of Arabic Manuscripts, 1958, Vol: III, p. 160;

Abu’l-Fadl Muhammad ibn Makarram ibn Ali al-Ansari Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, edited by Amin Muhammad Abdulwahhab and Muhammad al-Sadiq al-Ubaydi, 18 volumes, 2nd edition, Beirut, Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1997, Vol: XIII, p. 98;

Abu’l-Tahir Majd al-Din Muhammad ibn Yaqub al-Firuzabadi, Al-Qamus al-Muhit, 4 volumes, 4th edition, Egypt, Matbaat Dar al-Ma’mun, 1938, Vol: I, p. 249;

Abu’l-Fayz Murtada Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Zabidi, Taj al-Arus, edited by Ibrahim Terzi, 25 volumes, Beirut, Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1975, Vol: VII, p. 118;

Ibrahim Mustafa et al., Al-Mu’jam al-Wasit, Istanbul, Cagri Publishing, 1992, p. 867.

[5] Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, Vol: XIII, p. 98; Zabidi, op. cit., Vol: VII, p. 118. “Timar” refers to cleaning the skin and hair of a riding animal from dirt and the like.

[6] Ibrahim Mustafa et al., op. cit., p. 867.

[7] Heyet, Mevsuat al-Fiqhiyya, 45 vols., 2nd ed., Kuwait, Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, 1997, Vol. 37, p. 254.

[8] Mehmet Erdoğan, Masah, DIA, Vol. XXIX, p. 301.

[9] Nisa 4:43, Ma’idah 5:6, Sad 38:33.

[10] Sad 38/33.

[11] Halil b. Ahmed, Kitab al-ʿAyn, III, 156; Ibn Durayd, Jamhara al-Lughah, II, 156.

[12] Ibn Sidah, al-Muhkam wa al-Muhiṭ al-Aʿẓam, III, 160; Ibn Manẓur, Lisan al-ʿArab, XIII, 100; Zabidi, Taj al-ʿArus, VII, 120.

[13] Ibn Faris, Muʿjam Maqayis al-Lugha, V, 322; Jauhari, Sihah al-Lugha, I, 404.

[14] Nisa 4:43.

[15] Ma’idah 5/6.

[16] Bukhari, Maghazi, 16.

[17] Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XIII, 21; XIV, 558.

[18] Al-Nihaya is a work by Ibn al-Athir where he explains rare words in Hadiths alphabetically.

[19] Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, XIII, 98.

[20] Abu ‘Umar Jamal al-Din Yusuf ibn Abdullah Ibn Abd al-Barr al-Namari’s al-Tamhid lima fi’l-Muwatta’ min al-Ma’ani wa’l-Asaneed, edited by Mustafa ibn Ahmad al-Alawi, 26 volumes, Tıtvan, Ministry of Religious Affairs and Islamic Affairs, 1985, Volume XI, p. 139. This work is the commentary that the author wrote on Imam Malik’s Al-Muwatta.

[21] Abu al-Faraj Abdurrahman ibn Ali Ibn al-Jawzi, Gharib al-Hadith, edited by Abdulmuti Emin Kal’aci, 2 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1985, Volume II, p. 357.

[22] Zabidi, Taj al-Arus, VII, 118-120.

[23] Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Muslim Ibn Qutayba, Gharib al-Hadith, 2 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 1988, Volume I, p. 8.

[24] Ibn Qutayba, Gharib al-Hadith, Vol. I, pp. 8-9; Zabidi, Taj al-Arus, Vol. VII, pp. 118-119.

[25] Zabidi, Taj al-Arus, Vol. VII, pp. 119-120.

[26] Abu’l-Hasan Burhan al-Din Ali ibn Abi Bakr al-Marghinani, Al-Hidaya Sharh Bidayat al-Mubtadi, edited by Muhammad Muhammad Tamir, Hafiz Ashur Hafiz, 4 volumes, Cairo, Dar al-Salam, 2000, Vol. I, p. 25; Abu’l-Fadl Majd al-Din Abdullah ibn Mahmoud al-Mawsili, Al-Ikhtiyar li-ta’lil al-Mukhtar, edited by Shuayb al-Arna’ut, Ahmed Muhammad Berhum, Abdullatif Hirzallah, 4 volumes, Damascus, Dar al-Risala al-Alamiya, 2009, Vol. I, p. 40.

[27] Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Shaybani, Kitab al-Asl (al-Mabsut), edited by Abu’l-Wafa al-Afghani, 5 volumes, Beirut, Alam al-Kutub, 1990, Vol. I, pp. 28, 101.

[28] Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Sahl al-Sarakhsi, al-Mabsut, 15 volumes, Cairo, Matba’at al-Sa’ada, 1324 AH, Vol. I, pp. 8-9; Abu Bakr ibn Mas’ud al-Kasani, Bada’i’ al-Sana’i fi Tartib al-Shara’i, edited by Ali Muhammad Mu’awwiz and Adil Ahmad Abdul-Mawjud, 10 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1997, Vol. I, pp. 113-121.

[29] Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Idris ibn Abbas al-Shafi’i, Kitab al-Umm, edited by Ali Muhammad, Adil Ahmad, and Ahmad Isa Hasan Ma’sarawi, 10 volumes, Beirut, Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 2001, Vol. I, p. 94.

[30] Abu’l-Hasan Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Habib al-Mawardi, al-Hawi al-Kabir huwa Sharh Mukhtasar al-Muzani, edited by Ali Muhammad Muawwiz and Adil Ahmad Abdulmawjud, 19 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1994, Vol. I, p. 123; Abu Zakariyya Muhyiddin ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi, al-Majmu’ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab li’l-Shirazi, edited by Muhammad Najib Muti’, 23 volumes, Riyadh, Dar Alam al-Kutub, 2003, Vol. I, p. 231.

[31] Al-Mawardi, al-Hawi, Vol. I, pp. 124-125; al-Nawawi, al-Majmu’, Vol. I, pp. 232-233.

[32] Al-Mawardi, al-Hawi, Vol. I, pp. 125-128; al-Nawawi, al-Majmu’, Vol. I, pp. 232-233.

[33] Abu’l-Abbas Shihab al-Din Ahmad ibn Idris al-Qarafi, al-Dhakhira, edited by Muhammad Hajji, 13 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 1994, Vol. I, p. 269; Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Khattab al-Ruayni, Mawahib al-Jalil li Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 8 volumes, Riyadh, Dar Alam al-Kutub, 2003, Vol. I, p. 307.

[34] Abu al-Walid Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Rushd al-Qurtubi, Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid, 2 volumes, 6th edition, Beirut, Dar al-Ma’rifah, 1982, Volume I, pp. 15-16.

[35] Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qudamah al-Jama’ili al-Maqdisi, Al-Mughni, edited by Abdullah ibn Abdulmuhsin al-Turki and Abdulfattah Muhammad al-Hulw, 15 volumes, 2nd edition, Cairo, Hijr for Printing and Publishing, 1992, Volume I, pp. 184-189.

[36] Abu Muhammad Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sa’id ibn Hazm, Al-Muhalla, edited by Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, 11 volumes, Cairo, Idarat al-Tiba’ah al-Muniriyyah, 1928, Volume II, pp. 56-58.

[37] Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Hasan ibn Ali al-Tusi, Al-Mabsut fi Fiqh al-Imamiyyah, edited by Sayyid Muhammad Taqi al-Kashfi, 8 volumes, 3rd edition, Tehran, Al-Maktabah al-Murtazawiyyah, 1967, Volume I, p. 22; Al-Istibsar, edited by al-Sayyid Hasan Khursan, 4 volumes, 3rd edition, Tehran, Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah, 1970, Volume I, pp. 64-65.

[38] “هَذَا وُضُوءُ مَنْ لَمْ يُحدِثْ”

[39] For detailed information, see: Muhammad ibn Ali al-Karajiki, Al-Qawl al-Mubin ‘an Wujub Mashi al-Rijlayn, edited by Ali Musa Ka’bi, n.p., Majma’ al-Maliki li-Buhuth al-Hadarat al-Islamiyyah, 1996, pp. 20-21, 23-25, 30-36.

[40] For detailed information, see: Ja’far al-Subhani, Hukm al-Arjul fi al-Wudu’, Qom, Mu’assasat al-Imam al-Sadiq, 1417, pp. 28-41, 99-102.

[41] Narrated by a large group of people who cannot possibly agree to lie.

[42] The Qira’at imams Nafi’ (d. 169/785), Ibn Amir (d. 118/736), Abu Ja’far al-Qari (d. 130/747-48), Kisa’i (d. 189/805), Ya’qub al-Hadrami (d. 205/821) and Hafs (d. 180/796), who narrated from Asim (d. 127/745), recited the word arjul” with a fathah, connecting it to the word aydiyakum, resulting in arjula. It has been narrated that the Companions Umar (d. 23/644), Ibn Umar (d. 73/692), Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (d. 32/652-53), Ali (d. 40/661), and, according to one narration, Ibn Abbas (d. 68/687-88) held this view. Among the Tabi’un, scholars such as Urwah (d. 94/713), Mujahid (d. 103/721), Suddi (d. 127/745), A’mash (d. 148/765), Ibrahim al-Nakha’i (d. 96/714) and Dahhak (d. 105/723) also held the view that washing is commanded, following this recitation. See: Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan ‘an Ta’wil Ay al-Qur’an (Tafsir al-Tabari), edited by Abdullah ibn Abdulmuhsin al-Turki, 26 volumes, Riyadh, Dar ‘Alam al-Kutub, 2003, Vol. VIII, pp. 189-194; Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Ali al-Razi al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur’an, edited by Muhammad al-Sadiq Qamhawi, 5 volumes, Beirut, Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, 1985, Vol. III, p. 349.

[43] Ibn Kathir (d. 120/728), Abu Amr (d. 154/771), Hamza ibn Habib (d. 156/773), Khalaf ibn Hisham (d. 229/844), and Abu Bakr Shu’bah (d. 193/809), who narrated from Asim, recited the word in question as arjuli with a kasrah. According to this, the word arjul is connected to the phrase bi-ru’oosikum (your heads). According to the narrations, the view that the feet should be wiped was also supported by the Companions Ali, Ibn Abbas and Anas ibn Malik (d. 93/711-12), as well as by the Followers Amir al-Sha’bi (d. 104/722), Ikrimah (d. 105/723), Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir (d. 114/733) and Qatadah (d. 117/735). It is mentioned that Hasan (d. 110/728), Alqamah (d. 62/682), A’mash, Mujahid and Dahhak also recited this word with a kasrah. See: Abu Ja’far Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Salamah al-Tahawi, Ahkam al-Qur’an al-Karim, edited by Sadettin Ünal, 2 volumes, Istanbul, Turkish Religious Foundation Islamic Research Centre (ISAM), 1995, Vol. I, p. 81; Tabari, ibid., VIII, 195-198; Jassas, ibid., III, 349. Jassas states: The known view from Hasan al-Basri is that he wiped the entire foot. I do not know anyone else from the Salaf who considered it permissible to wipe the entire foot or part of it.

[44] Mustafa Öztürk, Polemics Between Ahl al-Sunnah and Shia in Tafsir, Ankara, Ankara Okulu Publications, 2009, pp. 323-324.

[45] This recitation (Qira’at) is attributed to A’mash and Hasan (al-Basri). It is also narrated by Walid ibn Muslim that Nafi’ recited in this way. See: Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Abdullah Ibn al-Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an, edited by Muhammad Abd al-Qadir Ata, 4 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, n.d., Vol. II, p. 80.

[46] Abu Hayyan Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Andalusi, Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit, 8 volumes, 2nd edition, n.p., Dar al-Fikr, 1983, Vol. III, p. 438.

[47] Abu Abdullah Muhammad b. Umar Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, 16 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1990, Volume VI, Part 11, p. 127; Abu Hayyan, al-Bahr al-Muhit, III, 437.

[48] For detailed information, see Ayşe Ulya Özek, The Issue of Wiping the Feet in the Context of Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, Istanbul, Suleymaniye Foundation Publications, 2016, pp. 89-98.

[49] Abu’s-Sana Shihab al-Din Mahmoud ibn Abdullah al-Alusi, Ruh al-Ma’ani fi Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Azim wa al-Sab al-Mathani, edited by Muhammad Hussein al-Arab, 30 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, 1997, Vol. V, pp. 110-113.

[50] Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, Vol. VI, p. 127.

[51] Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol. III, pp. 351-352.

[52] Ibn al-Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol. II, p. 72; Abu al-Qasim Jarallah Mahmud ibn Umar ibn Muhammad al-Zamakhshari, Al-Kashshaf ‘an Haqa’iq al-Tanzil wa ‘Uyun al-Aqawil fi Wujuh al-Ta’wil, 4 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, 1977, Vol. I, p. 597..

[53] Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol. III, p. 351.

[54] Abu al-Barakat Hafiz al-Din Abdullah ibn Ahmed ibn Mahmud al-Nasafi, Madarik al-Tanzil wa Haqa’iq al-Ta’wil, edited by Yusuf Ali Budaywi, 3 volumes, Beirut, Dar Ibn Kathir, 2008, Vol. I, pp. 430-431; Elmalili Muhammad Hamdi Yazir, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, edited by Ismail Karacam et al., 10 volumes, Istanbul, Feza Gazetecilik, n.d., Vol. III, p. 171; Muhammad Tahir Ibn Ashur, Tafsir al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir, 30 volumes, Tunis, al-Dar al-Tunisiyya, 1984, Vol. VI, p. 131; Nihat Dalgın, Gündemdeki Tartışmalı Konular, Istanbul, Etut Publications, 2004, p. 23.

[55] Fahreddin al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, Vol. VI, p. 128; Abu Ali al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan al-Tabarsi, Majma’ al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, 10 volumes, Beirut, Mu’assasat al-‘Alami li’l-Matbuat, 1995, Vol. III, p. 288.

[56] Muhammad Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi, Tafsir al-Qasimi (Mahasin al-Ta’wil), edited by Muhammad Fuad Abdulbaki, 17 volumes, 2nd edition, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, 1978, Vol. VI, p. 112.

[57] Süleyman Ateş, The Contemporary Interpretation of the Noble Quran, 12 volumes, Istanbul, Yeni Ufuklar Publishing, 1989, Vol. II, pp. 477-478.

[58] Mahasin al-Ta’wil, Vol. VI, p. 112; Süleyman Ateş, The Contemporary Interpretation of the Noble Quran, Vol. II, p. 480; Mustafa Öztürk, Polemics Between Ahl al-Sunnah and Shia in Tafsir, p. 334.

[59] Abu al-Qasim Dahhak ibn Muzahim, Tafsir al-Dahhak, edited by Muhammad Shukri Ahmed al-Zawiyati, 2 volumes, Cairo, Dar al-Salam, 1999, Vol. I, pp. 321-322.

[60] Abu al-Hasan Mukatil ibn Suleiman, Tafsir al-Kabir, edited by Abdurrahman Mahmoud Shahhata, translated by M. Beşir Eryarsoy, 4 volumes, Istanbul, Isaret Publications, 2006, Vol. I, p. 444.

[61] Abu Mansur Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Maturidi, Tafsir al-Kuran (Exegesis of the Quran), edited by Mehmet Boynukalın, annotated by Bekir Topaloğlu, 17 volumes, Istanbul, Mizan Publishing, 2005, Vol. IV, pp. 169-170.

[62] Abu Zakariya Yahya ibn Ziyad al-Farra, Ma’ani al-Qur’an (The Meanings of the Quran), 3 volumes, 2nd edition, Beirut, Alam al-Kutub, 1980, Vol. I, pp. 302-303.

[63] Abu ʿUbaydah al-Taymi, Maʿmar b. Musanna, Majaz al-Qurʾan edited by Fuat Sezgin, published by Muhammad Sami Amin al-Hanji, 2 volumes, Cairo, 1954, Volume I, page 155; Abu al-Hasan Saʿid b. Masʿadah al-Halabi al-Mujashiʿi Akhfash al-Awsaṭ, Maʿani al-Qurʾan, edited by ʿAbd al-Amir Muhammad Amin al-Ward, 2 volumes, Beirut, ʿAlam al-Kutub, 1985, Volume II, page 466.

[64] Abu Ishaq Ibrahim b. al-Sari al-Zajjaj, Maʿani al-Qurʾan wa Iʿrabuhu, edited by ʿAbd al-Jalil ʿAbduh Salabi, 5 volumes, Beirut, ʿAlam al-Kutub, 1988, Volume II, page 153; Abu Jaʿfar Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Nahhas, Iʿrab al-Qurʾan, edited by Zuhayr Ghazi Zahid, 5 volumes, Beirut, ʿAlam al-Kutub, 1988, Volume II, page 9; Abu Hayyan, al-Bahr al-Muhiṭ, Volume III, page 437.

[65] Ṭahawi, Ahkam al-Qurʾan, Volume I, pages 81-86.

[66] Jassas, Ahkam al-Qurʾan, Volume III, pages 349-351.

[67] Abu Bakr Muhammad b. ʿAbdallah Ibn al-ʿArabi, Ahkam al-Qurʾan, edited by Muhammad ʿAbd al-Qadir ʿAṭa, 4 volumes, Beirut, Dar al-Fikr, n.d., Volume II, pages 71-72.

[68] Abu ʿAbdallah Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Abi Bakr al-Kurtubi, al-Jamiʿ li Ahkam al-Qurʾan, edited by ʿAbdallah b. ʿAbd al-Muhsin al-Turki, 24 volumes, Beirut, Muʾassasat al-Risalah, 2006, Volume VII, pages 342-345, 348-349.

[69] Zamakhshari, al-Kashshaf, Volume I, page 597.

[70] Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, Volume VI, pages 127-128.

[71] Abu Saʿid Naṣir al-Din ʿAbdallah b. ʿUmar b. Muhammad al-Bayḍawi, Anwar al-Tanzil wa Asrar al-Tawil, 2 volumes, Istanbul, Şirket-i Ṣahafiye-i ʿOsmaniye, 1886, Volume I, page 326.

[72] Abu l-Fidaʾ Imad al-Din Ismaʿil b. ʿUmar Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qurʾan al-ʿAzim, edited by Sami b. Muhammad al-Salamah, 8 volumes, Riyadh, Dar al-Tayyibah, 1997, Volume III, pages 52-53.

[73] Qasimi, Mahasin al-Taʾwil, Volume VI, page 112.

[74] Rashid Riḍa, Tafsir al-Manar, Volume VI, page 235.

[75] Elmalılı Hamdi Yazır, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, Volume III, page 171.

[76] Ibn ʿAshur, al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir, Volume VI, pages 130-131.

[77] Süleyman Ateş, Yüce Kur’ân’ın Çağdaş Tefsiri, Volume II, pages 477-480.

[78] Bayraktar Bayraklı, Yeni Bir Anlayışın Işığında Kur’ân Tefsiri, 21 volumes, Istanbul, Bayraklı Yayınları, 2002, Volume V, page 477.

[79] Tabersî, Mecmeu’l-Beyân, III, 286-289.

[80] Muhammad Hussein b. Muhammad Tabatabaʿi, al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qurʾan, Beirut, Matbaat al-Watan, 20 volumes, 2nd ed., 1970, Volume V, pages 222-223.

[81] Surat al-Ma’idah 5/5; Surat at-Ta-Ha 20/129; Surat at-Tawbah 9/3.

[82] Abu Hayyan, in al-Bahr al-Muhit, Volume III, page 438, states that the insertion of a sentence between the attributed and the attributing terms and interpreting it as an indication of order or light washing is an inference made by those who support the washing view.

[83] Surah al-Ma’idah 5/38.

[84] Surah al-Ma’idah 5/33.

[85] Since the practice of the Prophet Muhammad and the companions was in this direction, the vast majority of Islamic jurists agree that the thief’s hand should be amputated at the wrist. See Ali Bardakoğlu, Theft, Dictionnaire de l’Islam, XVII, 390.

[86] Al-Ṭabari, Jamiʿ al-Bayan, Volume VIII, page 198.

[87] Bukhari, Tayammum, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; Muslim, Purification, 28; Abu Dawud, Purification, 121; Tirmidhi, Purification, 110; Nasa’i, Purification, 199, 200, 202.

[88] Abu Hayyan, Al-Bahr Al-Muhit, III, 437.

[89] Tabarsi, Majma’ al-Bayan, III, 287; Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, VI, 127.

[90] Hud 11:26, 84; Ibrahim 14:18; Rahman 55:35; Waqia 56:17-23; Insan 76:21.

[91] Muhiddin al-Darwish, I’rab al-Qur’an al-Karim wa Bayanuhu, Vol. IV, p. 337; Vol. V, p. 171; Vol. IX, pp. 409-410; Vol. X, pp. 324-325. For detailed information, see Ayşe Ulya Özek, The Issue of Wiping Over the Feet in the Context of Verse 6 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, pp. 70-73.

[92] Mücteba Uğur, Washing the Feet in Ablution According to the Qur’an and Sunnah, Islamic Studies, Vol. III, No. 2, 1989, p. 18; Tabersî, Mecmeu’l-Beyân, III, 286-287; Tabatabâî, el-Mîzân, V, 223.

[93] Bukhari, Ablution (Wudu), 48; Muslim, Purification (Tahara), 22; Abu Dawood, Purification (Tahara), 60.

[94] Abu Abdullah al-Asbahî al-Himyari, Al-Muwatta by Malik ibn Anas, ed. Abu Usama Salim ibn Eid al-Hilali al-Salafi, 4 vols., Dubai, Maktabat al-Furqan, 2003, Vol. I, pp. 221-223; Abu Bakr Abdullah ibn Zubair al-Humaydi, Al-Musnad, ed. Habiburrahman al-A’zami, 2 vols., Beirut, Alam al-Kutub, 1962, Vol. I, p. 202; Abu Bakr Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah, Al-Musannaf, ed. Muhammad Avvama, 26 vols., Jeddah, Dar al-Kibla, 2006, Vol. I, pp. 256-257; Abu Bakr Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam al-San’ani, Al-Musannaf, ed. Habiburrahman al-A’zami, 11 vols., 2nd ed., Beirut, Al-Majlis al-Ilmi, 1983, Vol. I, p. 44; Abu Abdullah Ahmed ibn Muhammad al-Shaybani, Musnad Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arnaut et al., 50 vols., Beirut, Maktabat al-Risala, 2001, Vol. II, pp. 23-24; XXVI, pp. 360-361, 372-373, 380-382, 384; Abdurrahman al-Darimi, Sunan al-Darimi, ed. Fawwaz Ahmed Zamli and Khalid al-Sab’i al-Alami, 2 vols., Beirut, Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi, 1987, Vol. I, p. 193 (Tahara, 37); Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, ed. Mustafa Dib al-Bughah, 6 vols., Damascus, Dar Ibn Kathir; Beirut, al-Yamama, 1990, Vol. I, pp. 80 (Wudu, 37, 40, 44); Abu al-Husayn al-Kushayri al-Naysaburi, Sahih Muslim, ed. Muhammad Fuad Abdulbaki, 5 vols., Cairo, Dar Ihya al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1955, Vol. I, p. 211 (Tahara, 7); Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah, 2 vols., Riyadh, Maktabat al-Tarbiya al-Arabi li-Duwal al-Khalij, 1986, Vol. I, p. 73 (Tahara, 51); Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, Sahih Sunan Abu Dawood, 3 vols., Riyadh, Maktabat al-Tarbiya al-Arabi li-Duwal al-Khalij, 1989, Vol. I, pp. 25-26 (Tahara, 50); Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 3 vols., Riyadh, Maktabat al-Tarbiya al-Arabi li-Duwal al-Khalij, 1988, Vol. I, p. 12 (Tahara, 24, 36); Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, Sahih Sunan al-Nasa’i, 3 vols., Riyadh, Maktabat al-Tarbiya al-Arabi li-Duwal al-Khalij, 1988, Vol. I, pp. 22-23 (Tahara, 80, 81); Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Huzaymah, Sahih Ibn Huzaymah, ed. Muhammad Mustafa Azami, 4 vols., Beirut, al-Maktaba al-Islamiya, 1975, Vol. I, pp. 79-80, 88-89, 101;

Alaeddin Ali ibn Balaban, Al-Ihsan fi Taqrib Sahih Ibn Hibban, ed. Shu’ayb al-Arnaut, 16 vols., Beirut, Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1987, Vol. III, pp. 358-359, 365-367, 373.

[95] Malik b. Anas, Muwatta’, I, 263-265; Sulayman b. Dawud al-Jarud, Musnad Abi Dawad al-Tayalisi, ed. Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-Turki, 4 vols., Giza, Hijr for Printing and Publishing, 1999, Vol. I, pp. 74-76; Ḥumaydi, Musnad, I, 21; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, I, 462, 467, 477, 514, 521, 524, 527, 531-532; ʿAbd al-Razzaq b. Hammam, Musannaf, I, 40-41, 44-45; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 260-261, 263; Darimi, Tahara, 27; Bukhari, Wuḍu’, 23, 27; Sawm, 27; Muslim, Tahara, 3, 4; Ibn Majah, Tahara, 57; Abu Dawud, Tahara, 50; Nasa’i, Tahara, 68-69, 94; Ibn Khuzayma, Sahih, I, 4-5, 81-82; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 318-319, 340-341, 343-344; Abu Bakr Aḥmad b. ʿAmr b. ʿAbd al-Khalik al-Bazzar, al-Baḥr al-Zakhkhar (Musnad al-Bazzar), ed. Maḥfuz al-Raḥman Zaynallah, 18 vols., Beirut, Dar al-ʿUlum al-Qur’an; Medina, Maktabat ʿUlum wa’l-Hikam, 1988, Vol. II, pp. 72-73; Abu ʿAwana Yaʿqub b. Ishaq al-Isfara’ini, Musnad Abi ʿAwana, ed. Ayman b. ʿArif al-Dimashqi, 5 vols., Beirut, Dar al-Maʿarif, 1998, Vol. I, pp. 190, 192-194.

[96] Tayalisi, Musnad, I, 125-126; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 253-255, 259, 298-301, 303; ʿAbd al-Razzaq b. Hammam, Musannaf, I, 19-20, 38-40; Humaydi, Musnad, I, 26; Darimi, Tahara, 43; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, II, 23, 139, 220-223, 239, 242-243, 256, 274, 284, 289, 291, 295-296, 309, 311, 350-351, 368, 370, 380, 384, 393, 437, 442, 452-453, 456-460, 471; Bukhari, Ashriba, 15; Ibn Majah, Tahara, 56; Abu Dawud, Tahara, 50, 51; Tirmidhi, Tahara, 37; Nasaʾi, Tahara, 75, 76, 78-79, 93, 100; Abu Yaʿla, Musnad, I, 246, 262, 300, 303, 385; Ibn Khuzayma, Sahih, I, 11-12, 76, 100-101; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 337, 339-340, 360-361; Bazzar, Musnad, II, 183-184, 309, III, 30-32, 39-43.

[97] Tayalisi, Musnad, IV, 381-382; Abdurrazzaq b. Hammam, Musannaf, I, 199, 201; Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf, I, 262-263; II, 276-277; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, IV, 239-240; Bukhari, Wudu, 7; Abu Dawood, Tahara, 50, 52; Nasa’i, Tahara, 85; Ibn Khuzaymah, Sahih, I, 77; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 360, 367; Ahmad b. Ali b. al-Muthanna Abu Ya’la al-Mawsili, Musnad of Abu Ya’la al-Mawsili, edited by Hussein Salim Asad, 13 volumes, Damascus, Dar al-Ma’mun li al-Turath, 1984, Volume I, pp. 448-449.

[98] Ibn Majah, Tahara, 6; Nasa’i, Tahara, 85.

[99] Ibn Majah, Tahara, 6; Nasa’i, Tahara, 108.

[100] Muslim, Tahara, 12.

[101] Muslim, Tahara, 12.

[102] Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam, al-Musannaf, Volume I, pages 22-26; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, Volume I, pages 269-273.

[103] Ibrahim Mustafa et al., al-Mu’jam al-Wasit, p. 506; Mevlut Sarı, al-Mawarid (Arabic-Turkish Dictionary), Istanbul, Bahar Publications, 1980, p. 855.

[104] Surah Al-Baqarah, Verse 19; Surah Nuh, Verse 7.

[105] Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan, VIII, 189-190. Also see: Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam, al-Musannaf, I, 22-25, 36-37; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, I, 269-271, 376.

[106] Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, I, 271.

[107] Ibn Majah, Tahara, 54. For verification, see Serdar Murat Gürses, “An Evaluation of Hadiths on Wudu and Wiping Over Bare Feet in the Kutub al-Sittah” Master’s Thesis, Istanbul, 2009, 64-66.

[108] Abu Dawud, Tahara, 59.

[109] Tabari, op. cit., VIII, 189-190.

[110] Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam, al-Musannaf, I, 25; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, I, 305-306.

[111] Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam, op. cit., I, 22.

[112] Mâwardi, al-Hawi, I, 126.

[113] Tabari, a.g.e., VIII, 191; Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an, II, 70-71.

[114] ʿAbd al-Razzaq b. Hammam, al-Muṣannaf, I, 36-37; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Muṣannaf, I, 376; Muslim, Ṭaharah, 10.

[115] Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Muṣannaf, I, 374-378.

[116] Serdar Murat Gürses, “Evaluation of the Hadiths Regarding Ablution and Wiping Over Bare Feet in the Six Canonical Collections”, Master’s Thesis, Istanbul, 2009, pp. 127-129.

[117] Ibn Majah, Purification, 48; Abu Dawud, Purification, 52; Nasa’i, Purification, 105.

[118] Necati Yeniel, Hüseyin Kayapınar, Translation and Commentary of Sunan Abu Dawud, I, 246; Serdar Murat Gürses, “Evaluation of Hadiths in the Kutub al-Sittah Regarding Ablution and Wiping Over Bare Feet”, Master’s Thesis, Istanbul, 2009, 83-84.

[119] Kasani, Bada’i‘ al-Ṣana’i‘, I, 113-121.

[120] Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, I, 255-256; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, I, 486, 522-523; al-Bazzar, al-Musnad, II, 74-75.

[121] Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan, VIII, 195. See also Ibn Abi Shaybah, Al-Musannaf, I, 306.

[122] Tabari, op. cit., VIII, 195.

[123] Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan, VIII, 195; Tabarsi, Majma’ al-Bayan, III, 284. See also: Abdurazzaq b. Hammam, Al-Musannaf, I, 19, 22; Humaydi, Musnad, I, 163-165; Ibn Abi Shayba, Al-Musannaf, I, 305; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, XLIV, 565-566; Ibn Majah, Tahara, 56.

[124] Darimi, Salat, 78; Ibn Majah, Tahara, 57; Abu Dawud, Salat, 149; Bazzar, Musnad, IX, 178; Nasa’i, Iftitah, 167.

[125] Tayalisi, Musnad, II, 436; Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf, II, 279; XX, 165; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XXVI, 79-80, 88, 91, 99; Abu Dawud, Tahara, 62; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, IV, 168.

[126] Nebi Bozkurt, “Na’l-i Şerif”, DİA, XXXII, 346. The Prophet (peace be upon him) states that those in ihram who do not have sandals may wear huff (a type of boot) that are cut below the ankles. See: Bukhari, “Hajj”, 21; “The Punishment for Hunting”, 15; “Clothing”, 37; Muslim, “Hajj”, 1, 2, 3. Therefore, shoes that are below the ankles are also included under the category of na‘l.

[127] Malik ibn Anas, Muwatta’, II, 418-419; Abdur-Razzaq, Musannaf, I, 202; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, VIII, 298; Bukhari, Wudu’, 29; Muslim, Hajj, 5; Abu Dawood, Menasik, 21; Nasa’i, Tahara, 95; bn Khuzaymah, Sahih, I, 100; Abu Avanah, Musnad, II, 424.

[128] Tabari, op. cit., VIII, 197.

[129] Jami’ al-Bayan, VIII, 196. Also see: Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf, I, 297-298.

[130] Tabari, op. cit.

[131] Tabari, op. cit., VIII, 196-197. Also see Abdurrazzaq b. Hammam, Musannaf, I, 19; Ibn Abi Shayba, op. cit., I, 298, 302.

[132] Tayâlisî, Musnad, IV, 46; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XI, 412-413, 475, 558, 672; Ibn Abî Shayba, Musannaf, I, 326; Bukhari, Ilm, 3, 30, Wudu’, 26; Muslim, Tahara, 9; Ibn Maja, Tahara, 55; Abu Dawud, Tahara, 46; al-Nasa’i, Tahara, 89; al-Bezzar, Musnad, VI, 353-354; Ibn Khuzaymah, Sahih, I, 83-84, 86; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 335; Abu ʿAwana, Musnad, I, 194-195, 210.

[133] Tayalisi, Musnad, III, 342; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 326-327; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XXII, 287, XXIII, 220, 373, 390; Ibn Maja, Tahara, 55; Abu Ya’la, Musnad, IV, 52, 110, 201; Abu Awana, Musnad, I, 212.

[134] For the narrations from Abu Hurayrah, see: Tayalisi, Musnad, IV, 228; Abdurrazaq ibn Hammam, Musannaf, I, 21; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 327; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XII, 18-19; XIII, 203, 221; XV, 151, 161, 174-175, 341; XVI, 108, 176, 282; Bukhari, Wudu’, 28; Muslim, Tahara, 9; Ibn Maja, Tahara, 55; Tirmidhi, Tahara, 31; al-Nasa’i, Tahara, 89; Abu Awana, Musnad, I, 211-212; Ibn Khuzaymah, Sahih, I, 84; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 368. For the narrations from Aisha, see: Malik ibn Anas, Muwatta’, I, 224; Tayalisi, Musnad, III, 135-136; Abdurrazaq ibn Hammam, Musannaf, I, 23; Humaydi, Musnad, I, 87; Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 325; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XL, 149; XLI, 62, 91, 213; XLIII, 277; Muslim, Tahara, 9; Ibn Maja, Tahara, 55; Ibn Hibban, Sahih, III, 341; Abu Ya’la, Musnad, VII, 400; Abu Awana, Musnad, I, 211.

[135] Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf, I, 314, II, 250; Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, XXIX, 154; Darimi, Tahara, 38; Bukhari, Wudu’, 47; Ibn Majah, Tahara, 89.

[136] Ibn Abi Shayba, op. cit., XX, 164.

[137] Mehmet Boynukalın, Tayammum DİA, XLI, 51; Mustafa Fayda, The Incident of Ifk, DİA, XXI, 507-508.

[138] Mustafa İzci, An Examination of Surah Al-Ma’idah from a Recitation (Qira’at) Perspective, M.A. Thesis, Dokuz Eylül University Institute of Social Sciences, İzmir, 1996, pp. 8-9.

[139] For detailed information, see Abdulaziz Bayındır, Misconceptions That We Think To Be True in the Light of the Qur’an, 4th ed., Istanbul, Süleymaniye Foundation Publications, 2011, pp. 314-323; Fatih Orum, The Method of Understanding the Qur’an Based on the Qur’an and Sunnah, Istanbul, Süleymaniye Foundation Publications, 2013, pp. 152-157.

[140] Abdulaziz Bayındır, Misconceptions That We Think To Be True, pp. 296-301; For more information, see Fatih Orum, The Method of Understanding the Qur’an, pp. 140-151.

[141] In Surah Al-An’am, after mentioning the names of eighteen Prophets, it is stated in Verse 90 that along with them, Allah also chose Prophets from among their fathers, descendants and brothers, and guided them. The Verse then says: “These are the ones whom Allah has guided, so follow their guidance. Say: I do not ask you for any payment for it (the Qur’an). It is only a reminder to the worlds”. The phrase “their guidance-path” in this Verse should be understood as referring to their Sharia (religious law). This is because the preceding Verse mentions that Allah gave them Scripture, wisdom and prophethood. Indeed, Razi also indicates that this phrase can be understood as referring to their Sharia, and after addressing the counterarguments, he states that this Verse is evidence for the concept of “the legislation of those before us” (shar’u man qablana). See: Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb, Vol. VII, Part: 13, pp. 57-58.

[142] The Prophet (peace be upon him) reportedly said, after requesting water and washing his limbs three times, “This is my ablution (wudu) and the ablution of the Prophets before me” and “This is my ablution and the ablution of Ibrahim, the friend of Allah.” Refer to: Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, Vol. X, 27; Vol. XXIX, 25-27; Ibn Maja, Tahara, 47. Although the chains of narration for these Hadiths are considered weak, it seems unlikely that the Prophet (peace be upon him) could have accurately learned this information from the polytheistic Arab society or the People of the Book at the beginning of Islam. It is most likely that Angel Gabriel (peace be upon him) taught him. There are narrations in some sources to support this: According to one narration, at the beginning of the revelation, Angel Gabriel came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and taught him ablution. Another narration states that when prayer was made obligatory, Angel Gabriel came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and struck his heel on the ground at the edge of a valley, causing water to gush forth. The Prophet (peace be upon him), observing this, performed ablution by washing his face, rinsing his mouth and nose, wiping his head and ears, washing his arms up to the elbows and washing his feet up to the ankles. Refer to: Abu Umar Jamaluddin Yusuf ibn Abdullah Ibn Abd al-Barr al-Namiri, al-Istidhkar al-Jami’ li Madhahib Fuqaha al-Amsar wa Ulama al-Aqtar, edited by Abdulmu’ti Ameen Kal’aji, 30 volumes, Beirut, Dar Al-Kutub Al-‘Ilmiyya, 1993, Vol. I, pp. 183-184.

[143] Al-Baqarah 2:41, 89, 91, 97, 101; Al ‘Imran 3:3, 50, 81, and other relevant Verses.

[144] “The Lord said to Moses: ‘Make a bronze basin with a bronze stand for washing. Place it between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and put water in it. Aaron and his sons are to wash their hands and feet with water from it. Whenever they enter the Tent of Meeting or approach the altar to minister by offering a food offering to the Lord, they must wash with water so that they will not die. This is to be a lasting ordinance for Aaron and his descendants for the generations to come.'” See: Exodus 30:18-21. “Bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting and wash them with water… He placed the basin between the Tent of Meeting and the altar and put water in it for washing. And Moses and Aaron and his sons washed their hands and feet with water from it. Whenever they entered the Tent of Meeting or approached the altar, they washed as the Lord commanded Moses…” (Exodus: 40:12, 30-32) The washing described here is most likely related to the ablution required before worship. It instructs that hands and feet should be washed before entering the Tent of Meeting. However, there is no mention of washing the face and head. The text indicates that the actions within the Tent of Meeting are related to worship. What is important for us is that feet washing is required. In a YouTube video titled “Jews Performing Ablution and Praying”, a Jewish person’s ablution is nearly identical to the ablution we perform. This form of ablution has been passed down through established practice rather than learned from the Qur’an. Notably, while the person washes his face with running water, he washes his feet and hands with a brass ewer. The Torah says, “Make a bronze basin for washing. The stand should also be of bronze. Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and (their) feet there”. The Jewish practice of using a brass ewer for ablution shows a connection with this passage from the Torah.

[145] Abu’l-Hasan Ali b. Omar b. Ahmad al-Daraqutni, Sunan al-Daraqutni, edited by Shu’ayb Arna’ut, Hasan Abdulmun’im Shalabi, Abdullatif Hirzullah, Ahmed Berhum, 6 vols., Beirut, Mu’assasat al-Risalah, 2004, Vol. I, p. 357.

[146] Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, XXXI, 551.

[147] Abdurrazzaq ibn Hammam, al-Musannaf, I, 195.

[148] Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Kubrâ, Volume 1, Page 272.

[149] Daraqutni, The Sunan of al-Daraqutni, I, 365.

[150] Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, II, 239.

Add comment

Categories