Wudu: Is shia wudu against quran?

& the answer is yes. Shia perform wudu against the quranic guidance. Lets see how!

Here is the verse of suran maidah verse 6.

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 جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِّنكُم مِّنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم مِّنْهُ مَا يُرِيدُ اللّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ


We need this part:
فاغْسِلُواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُواْ بِرُؤُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَينِ


Here is english wordings for non-arabic readers:
faighsiloo wujoohakum waaydiyakum ila almarafiqi waimsahoo biruoosikum waarjulakum ila alkaAAbayni

The main difference of sunni/shia wudu is washing or wiping the feets i.e. "arjulakum".

Now 2 types of shia arguments arises.

Shia says: 1st we perform massah on feet bcoz it is "arjulikum" not "arjulakum" i.e. arjulakum is wrong.

& 2nd we perform massah on feet bcoz it is "arjulakum".

Now lets refute both arguments one by one.

I. The main question, how to read? Waarjulakum like in Quran? Or waArjulikum like shia wants?

I challange shia: To show us quran compiled by their own ayatullah's, who accepted arjulikum but not arjulakum.

So due to correct reading is "wa Arjulakum" then in this case we should to wash the feet as it is "ma'toof" on "Wujoohakum"

The Qur'an we use uses the word "wa Arjulakum" yet you shia guys wipe off your feet based on the fact that the word in the Qur'an is "wa Arjulikum". Now, having said this we are faced with two options:

1- The current word in the Qur'an (wa Arjulakum) is correct, and therefore feet must be washed as faces must be washed.

2- The current word in the Qur'an is incorrect, and originally it was (wa Arjulikum), and therefore feet must be wiped off just like the heads.

If you go with option 1, then you must agree with AhluSunnah and wash your feet.
If you go with option 2, then you must agree with our charge that the Shi'ites believe in the distortion of the Qur'an.

The Shi'ites' argument for wiping off the feet is that the word must be (wa Arjulikum) as it is ma'toof on the word (Biru'oosikum). We AhluSunnah say it is (wa Arjulakum) as apparant in the Qur'an, and it is ma'toof on (Wujoohakum).

The Shi'ites for centuries have based their ruling of wiping off their feet on the fact that the word is recited (wa Arjulikum).

As such, how do you look at this issue? Because if the word is "as is", then the (Nasb) refers to the verb washing (faghsiloo فاغسلوا). Unless we go by the Shi'ites charge, that the Sahabah have changed and altered the Qur'an, there is no logical explanation to wiping off the feet if you base it on the word as it exists in the Qur'an.



& here is the proof that correct one is our reading:

The Messenger [saw] said: “al-Muslimoona inda shurootihim” meaning, Muslims stand firm by their words (conditions).

“Narrated Ghalib b. al-Huzail, I asked Abu Ja’far [as] about His saying: (وامسحوا برؤوسكم وأرجلكم إلى الكعبين) is it with khafdh (kasra) or nasb (fat-ha), he replied: it is with khafdh (kasra).

Sources: Tafseer al-Ayyashi, Al-Ayyashi al-Samarqandi, vol.1, p. 330
Tafseer al-Saafi, al-Faydh al-Kashaani, vol.2, p.16
Al-Hadaa’iq al-Naadhira, al-Muhaqqiq al-Bahraani, vol.2, p.289 & vol.8, p.104.
Jawaahirul-Kalaam, al-Sheikh al-Jawahiri, vol.2, p.207
Kitaab al-Tharah I, Sayyid Galbaygani p. 89
Fiqhul-Saadiq [as], Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Ruhani, vol.1, p.277
Tahtheeb al-Ahkaam, al-Sheikh al-Tusi, vol.1, p.71
Wasaa’el al-Shi’a, al-Hur al-‘Aamili, Chapter 25, Narration # 1097, 1099
Mustadrak al-Wasaa’el, al-Mirza al-Nuri, Chapter 23, Narration # 1/712, 1/714
Al-tafseer al-Asfaa, al-Faydh al-Kashaani, vol.1, p.264

According to Mustadrak al-Wasaa’el, narration 1/712: wa Arjulikum is the recitation of Ahlul-Bayt.

Now, Allamah al-Hilli, in his “al-Risalah al-Sa’diyyah” says:

"وتقرير الاستدلال أن نقول: عطف الله تعالى الأرجل على الرؤوس لوجوه: الأول: أنها مجرورة ولم يتقدم اسم مجرور عليه بحيث يعطف عليه سوى الرؤوس فتعين العطف عليها"

Publisher: Kitab khanah Omomi Hazrat Ayatollah al-Odhma Mir’ishi Najafi, Qum
1st edition, 1410, Behmen Press, Qum, p. 89

I will attempt here to translate it to the best of my ability, but advise you to refer to the book itself:

Translation: “In presentation of our argument we say, Allah ta’ala have referred(atafa) the feet back to heads, which has several points to present:
One: That (the word Arjul) is majroor (maksoor), though no majroor noun has preceded it in order to refer it to, save the heads, and in this case it is mandatory to refer (atf) it back to (heads).”

So according to Allamah al-Hilli, the word Arjul is to be read “Arjulikum”.

Interesting enough, Allamah al-Hilli, as well as al-Sharif al-Murtadha, rejects what you’ve suggested regarding (atf ala alaqrab).

He wrote:
“It cannot be said, Majroor bil-mujawarah (ala alaqrab as you put it), because we say the scholars have negated that.
Al-Kasaa’i said: there is no instance in the Qur’an where (jar) was based on mujawarah, and his statement is a Hujjah….. Furthermore, (jar) through majawarah never comes along with the letter (waw).

So please reshuffle your argument, and solve this issue for me in order to put it to rest.

But what seems most interesting, is the narration reported by Al-Ayyashi in his Tafseer, on the same reference mentioned above which literally says:

"58- Ali b. Abi Hamzah said: I asked Abu Ibrahim [as] about His saying: (O ye who believe! when ye prepare for prayer) down to His saying (to the ankles), he said: Allah has told the Truth. I said, may I be your ransom, how should (the person) perform the ablution? He said: twice -twice. I said, (should he) wipe off? He said, once -once. I said, once by the water? He said, yes. I said, may I be your ransom, what about the feet? he said, wash them (good) washing"

II. Some shias try to deceive less knowledgeable sunni's by applying wrong grammetic concepts i.e. of "bi"

Let me write again the same relevant part of the verse:
faighsiloo wujoohakum waaydiyakum ila almarafiqi waimsahoo biruoosikum waarjulakum ila alkaAAbayni

shia says: as any arab should know like agha pooya says the "bi" implies a "'part (tabeez)'' and 'not the whole (istiaab)' and hence the "bi" for wiping a part of the head and "bi" in tayyamum to wipe parts of face and hands. This was asked of imam sadiq(as) as to why you only wipe a part of your head and he explained that the "bi" which to any arab implies not the whole but a part.

This fool shia lied above bcoz "bi" is not only used to define "tabeez i.e. part less than whole" but also used for defining "whole" called "istiaab" in arabic grammer.

Now lets crack his arguments:

Why only the top of the feet and not whole of it including bottom, sides etc.? Let me ask you this, is "bi" also for ارجلكم or not? Is it wiping part of the feet to the ankles or wiping the whole of the feet to the ankles? If it's part then the effect of "bi" would also cause "ArjulAkum" to be Arjulikum" with kasrah like it's the case with faces and hands in tayammum in the same verse. If you say whole of the feet, then why in your fiqh books it says only the top of the feet and not whole of it including beneath, sides, between the toes? This means either the narrations said this based on the reading 'Arjulikum" and therefore said "part of the feet" or it is whole of the feet but narrations and your fiqh contradicts this.

Tabtaba’i includes the following narration from al-Kâfi;

وفي الكافي بإسناده عن زرارة قال: قلت لأبي جعفر عليه السلام: من أين علمت وقلت: إن المسح ببعض الرأس وبعض الرجلين؟ فضحك ثم قال: يا زرارة قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم، ونزل به الكتاب من الله، لأن الله عزّ وجلّ يقول: { فاغسلوا وجوهكم } فعرفنا أن الوجه كله ينبغي أن يغسل ثم قال: { وأيديكم إلى المرافق } فوصل اليدين إلى المرفقين بالوجه فعرفنا أنه ينبغي لهما أن تغسلا إلى المرفقين، ثم فصل بين الكلام فقال: { وامسحوا برؤوسكم } فعرفنا حين قال: { برؤوسكم } أن المسح ببعض الرأس لمكان الباء، ثم وصل الرجلين بالرأس كما وصل اليدين بالوجه فقال: { وأرجلكم إلى الكعبين } فعرفنا حين وصلهما بالرأس أن المسح على بعضهما، ثم فسر ذلك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم للناس فضيّعوه ثم قال: { فإن لم تجدوا ماءً فتيمموا صعيداً طيباً وامسحوا بوجوهكم وأيديكم منه } فلما وضع الوضوء إن لم يجدوا ماءً أثبت بعض الغسل مسحاً لأنه قال: { بوجوهكم } ثم وصل بها { وأيديكم } ثم قال: { منه } أي من ذلك التيمم، لأنه علم أن ذلك أجمع لم يجر على الوجه لأنه يعلق من ذلك الصعيد ببعض الكف ولا يعلق ببعضها، ثم قال الله: { ما يريد الله ليجعل عليكم من حرج } والحرج الضيق.

al-Kulayni narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurarah that he said, "I said to Abu Ja'far (a.s.), 'From where did you know and say that wiping should be done to a part of head and a part of feet.' He (the Imam) laughed and said, 'O Zurarah! The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) has said so and the Book has been revealed by Allah with this order, because Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says: wash your faces, so we know that the whole face should be washed. Then He says: and your hands as far as the elbows; in this way, the hands up to the elbows have been joined with face (in one order) and we know that they too should be washed up to the elbows. Then He disjointed the speech and said: and wipe a part of your heads; when He used the preposition "bi" before "your heads", we understood that wiping should cover only a part of the head. Then He joined the feet with the head (in that order) as had joined the hands with the face, and said: and your feet to the ankles. Now, because He has joined them with the head, we know that wiping should cover only a part of the feet. Then the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) explained it to the people but they neglected it. Then (Allah) said: and (if) you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith. When wudu' was waived in the absence of water, wiping (with earth) was ordered for part of (the organs) which were washed (in wudu') because He has said: part of your faces, then has joined with it the hands (that is, parts of it). Then He has said: therewith, that is, in tayammum. It was so ordained because Allah knew that the wiping with earth would not cover the whole face as the earth adheres to parts of the palms leaving other portions untouched. Then Allah said: Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty; and al-haraj means difficulty.'" (al-Kafi).

This one has another variant as following in Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih:

212 - وقال زرارة: قلت لابي جعفر عليه السلام: " ألا تخبرني من أين علمت وقلت: إن المسح ببعض الرأس وبعض الرجلين؟ فضحك وقال: يا زرارة قاله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ونزل به الكتاب من الله لان الله عزوجل قال: " فاغسلوا وجوهكم " فعرفنا أن الوجه كله ينبغي أن يغسل، ثم قال: " وأيديكم إلى المرافق " فوصل اليدين إلى المرفقين بالوجه فعرفنا أنه ينبغى لهما أن يغسلا إلى المرفقين، ثم فصل بين الكلام فقال: " وامسحوا برؤسكم " فعرفنا حين قال: " برؤسكم " أن المسح ببعض الرأس لمكان الباء، ثم وصل الرجلين بالرأس كما وصل اليدين بالوجه فقال: " وأرجلكم إلى الكعبين " فعرفنا حين وصلهما بالرأس أن المسح على بعضهما، ثم فسر ذلك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله للناس فضيعوه ثم قال: " فلم تجدوا ماء فتيمموا صعيدا طيبا فامسحوا بوجوهكم " فلما أن وضع الوضوء عمن لم يجد الماء أثبت بعض الغسل مسحا (3) لانه قال: " بوجوهكم " ثم وصل بها " وأيديكم منه " أي من ذلك التيمم لانه علم أن ذلك أجمع لم يجر على الوجه لانه يعلق من [ ذلك ] الصعيد ببعض الكف ولا يعلق ببعضها، ثم قال الله: " ما يريد الله ليجعل عليكم من حرج " والحرج الضيق "

And Zurara said: I said to Abu Ja`far عليه السلام: Will you not inform me from where you have learnt? And I said: The wiping is on part of the head and part of the two feet? So he laughed and said: Oh Zurara, the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and his family, said it and by it the Book descended from Allah, for Allah, `azza wa jalla, said “And wash your faces” so we knew that the face, all of it, was appropriate to be washed, then He said “and you hands to the elbows”, so He connected the hand to the elbows with the face, so we knew that it is appropriate for them to be washed to the elbows, then He separated between the speech, so He said “And wipe by your heads” so we knew that when He said “by your heads” that the wiping is by part of the head because of the place of the “by”, then He connected the two feet with the head as He had connected the two hands with the face. So He said “and your feet to the two mounds” so we knew that when they were connected with the head that wiping was upon part of them. Then the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and his family, explained to the people but they lost it. Then He said “So if you do not find water then do tayammum with pure dirt wiping your faces” so when the wudu was put aside for the one that does not find water, some of the washing was established as wiping for He said “by your faces” then connected it with “and your hands with it”, that is, from that tayammum, for He knew that that entirety does not pour upon the face for from that dirt some becomes sticks to the palm and some of it does not stick. Then Allah said “Allah does not intend to place narrowness upon you” and narrowness is hardship.

http://www.tashayyu.org/hadiths/tahara/wudu/wudu-narrations-from-al-faqih


و فيه، بإسناده عن زرارة و بكير: أنهما سألا أبا جعفر (عليه السلام) عن وضوء رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) فدعا بطست أو تور فيه ماء فغمس يده اليمنى فغرف بها غرفة فصبها على وجهه فغسل بها وجهه، ثم غمس يده اليسرى فغرف بها غرفة فأفرغ على ذراعه اليمنى فغسل بها ذراعه من المرافق إلى الكف لا يردها إلى المرافق، ثم غمس كفه اليمنى فأفرغ بها على ذراعه اليسرى من المرفق، و صنع بها ما صنع باليمنى، ثم مسح رأسه و قدميه ببلل كفه لا يحدث لهما ماء جديدا، ثم قال: و لا يدخل أصابعه تحت الشراك. ثم قال: إن الله عز و جل يقول: «إذا قمتم إلى الصلاة فاغسلوا وجوهكم و أيديكم» فليس له أن يدع شيئا من وجهه إلا غسله، و أمر أن يغسل اليدين إلى المرفقين، فليس له أن يدع من يديه إلى المرفقين شيئا إلا غسله لأن الله يقول: «اغسلوا وجوهكم - و أيديكم إلى المرافق»، ثم قال: «و امسحوا برءوسكم و أرجلكم إلى الكعبين» فإذا مسح بشيء من رأسه أو بشيء من قدميه ما بين الكعبين إلى أطراف الأصابع فقد أجزأه. قال: فقلنا: أين الكعبان؟ قال: هنا يعني المفصل دون عظم الساق، فقلنا: هذا ما هو؟ فقال: هذا من عظم الساق، و الكعب أسفل من ذلك، فقلنا: أصلحك الله و الغرفة الواحدة تجزي للوجه و غرفة للذراع؟ قال: نعم إذا بالغت فيها، و اثنتان تأتيان على ذلك كله

أقول: و الرواية من المشهورات، و رواها العياشي عن بكير و زرارة عن أبي جعفر (عليه السلام)، و عن عبد الله بن سليمان عن أبي جعفر (عليه السلام) مثله، و في معناها و معنى الرواية السابقة روايات أخر

Also al-Kulayni narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurarah and Bakir that both of them asked Abu Ja'far (a.s.) about the wudu' of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.). He (the Imam) asked for a wash-bowl with water; he dipped his right hand, scooped a handful of water and pouring it on his face washed the face with it; then he dipped his left hand and scooped a handful of water and pouring it on his right arm washed the arm from the elbow to the palm without returning the hand to the elbow; then he dipped his right palm (in the water) and poured it on his left arm and did as he had done with the right arm; then he wiped his head and feet with wetness of his palms without adding new water to them. Then he said, "One should not insert his fingers under the shoelace." Then (the Imam) said, "Surely Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says: When you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands, it is therefore not proper to leave any part of one's face without washing and Allah has ordered to wash the hands to the elbows, it is therefore not proper for him to leave any part of his hands up to the elbows without washing, because Allah says: wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows. Then Allah has said: and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles. So, if he wiped a part of his head or a part of his feet between the ankles and toe-tips, his wudu' will be completed." The narrators said, "We asked, 'Where are the ankles?' (The Imam) said, 'Here (pointing to the joint of feet with bone of leg).' We said, 'What is this?' (The Imam) said, This is the bone of leg, and ankle is below it.' Then we asked, 'May Allah make your affairs good! One handful (of water) is enough for the face and one handful for the arm?1 (The Imam) said, 'Yes, if you use it properly and two handfuls cover the whole wudu'.' " (ibid.)

The author says: This tradition is well known; al-' Ayyashi has narrated it from Bakir and Zurarah from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) and has narrated a similar tradition through Abdullah ibn Sulayman from Abu Ja'far (a.s.); also there are other traditions having similar connotation as well as of the preceding tradition in other books.

Considering this then 'ArjulAkum' must be 'Arjulikum' because of the effect of ب. Because if you exclude the feet from "bi", it doesn't mean "part of the feet" but whole of the feet according to your own argument.


Now lets move to extract of above arguments:

Lets see two of the sentences i.e. aamana billah & uqsimu biyaumiddin.

Here also "bi" is coming.

So according to shia rafida's this "bi" is used for "tabeez i.e. part but not whole" (as seen above). So lets see:
'aamana billah' means 'he believe in ALLAH' therefore shia don't believe in complete ALLAH becoz they alwz consider "bi" for tabeez.

'uqsimu biyaumiddin' means 'i swear by the day of judgment' therefore shia don't believe on qiyamah (last day) completely i.e.why the swear incompletely bcoz they alwz use "bi" for tabeez.


Now My logic: These two sentences are similar to that of "waimsahoo biruoosikum" but above "bi" is used for istiaab but not for tabeez!

I. I want to know why in wudu verse "bi" is used as "tabeez" but not as "istiaab"?

If we consider it as tabeez than two more problems arises in shia faith i.e."bi" is connected to "arjulakum" then we have to perform partial massah. But for massah, as per arabic grammar two conditions arises:

1. this "arjulakum" is atf on "biruoosikum", Then this "arjulakum" will become "arjulikum" [if we perform partial maasah] (as our ulema & hadith of imam told us)

2. this "arjulakum" is not atf on "biruoosikum", Then this "arjulakum" will remain "arjulakum" but here no role of "bi" then we must have to perform full massah (which is not told by any ulema).

& as we can see in both conditions there is problem.


II. For massah:
consider two verses i.e. "imsahoo biruoosikum waarjulakum" for wudu & "imsahoo biwujoohikum waaydeekum" for tayamuum. (same verse i.e. suran maidah verse 6)

Now as we can see above in tayammum verse "aydeekum" is atf on "biwujoohikum", therefore due to "bi" fatah changes to kasrah because both are interconnected via "bi". (because in arabic in one sentence we use only once "bi" in starting then afterwards we change fatah to kasrah for connecting the next comming words in same sentences i.e. we never use "bi" again & again).
But in wudu verse "arjulakum" is atf on "biruoosikum" then why here fatah is not converted to kasrah (if it is really atf on "biruoosikum" for massah)

Note 1: my most important point: why we are considering "bi" for "tabeez" but not for "istiaab"? What is the condition!

Note 2: If we consider "bi" for istiaab for the sake of shia's, the again there arises problems which you can understand which is same as above.


So the point is the shia wudu is in great dilemma whatever they consider. His wudu style goes against quran every time.


& the most funniest thing in shia faith: that shias do not have sahih hadeeth regarding ablution, and that all the ahadeeth regarding ablution are daif (weak)

he basically spoke of masah on feet.

first, he mentioned two narrations from istibsaar, and said that there are two ahadeeth in tusi's book

in first, salim is majhool as per fehrest tanqih; he says that there are 32 men with this name, and just two are thiqa (truthfull), rest all are daif (weak)

then he mentioned another one in which ghalib mola hazeel is majhool

same wise, he mentioned the chapter of furo al kafi, and said that all 11 narrations are daif there

what i found interesting is the fact that he quoted mainly from tanqeeh ul miqaal. and when he reached the narrations where zararah bin ayeen was mentioned, he switched to rijal of kashi and menionted that imam termed him liar.

so Ya shia i challange u: Show any sahih hadeeth regarding wudu?