Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:6

Tafsir of Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:6) - Mafatih al-Ghayb (Al-Razi)

Verse 6: O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows, and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles...

The Surah began with the command: "O you who have believed, fulfill [all] contracts" (5:1). This establishes a covenant between the Lord (Rububiyyah) and the servant (Ubudiyyah). God fulfills His covenant of Lordship first by detailing permissible worldly benefits (food and marriage). Having completed the discussion on permissible foods and marriages, it is as if God says: "I have fulfilled My covenant regarding worldly enjoyments; now, you must fulfill your covenant of servitude."

Since the greatest act of obedience after faith is Salat (Prayer), and Salat cannot be established without Purity (Tahara), God begins by mentioning the prerequisites for Wudu (ablution), starting with the command: "O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows..."

Issue 1: The Meaning of "When you rise to [perform] prayer" (إذا قمتم إلى الصلواة)

It does not mean the physical act of standing up.

1. Argument 1: If it meant the physical standing, Wudu would necessarily be delayed until after the prayer has begun, which is invalid by consensus (Ijma).
2. Argument 2: Consensus holds that if one performs Wudu while sitting or lying down before prayer, the obligation is fulfilled.

Therefore, the meaning is: When you intend and prepare to stand for prayer. This is a common metaphorical usage (Majaz):

1. Argument 1: A firm intention (Iradah Jazimah) is the cause (Sabab) of the action; using the cause's name for the result is a common metaphor.
2. Argument 2: Similar usage is found in "Men are the maintainers/protectors (Qawwamun) of women" (4:34), where Qawwamun means being responsible or intending, not physical standing. Similarly, "standing for justice" (Qā'iman bil-qist) means being committed to it.

Thus, "When you rise to prayer" means "When you intend to perform and engage in the prayer."

Issue 2: The Status of the Command for Wudu

Some scholars argue that the command for Wudu is subordinate to the command for prayer, not an independent obligation.

• Reasoning: The structure is conditional: If you rise to prayer (condition), then wash (result/command). The command for Wudu is contingent upon the condition of rising for prayer.

Others argue that Wudu's purpose is Purity itself, which is intrinsically valuable:

• Quranic Evidence: The verse concludes: "But Allah intends to purify you."
• Hadith Evidence: The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Religion is founded upon cleanliness," and "My Ummah will be recognized on the Day of Resurrection by the white marks from Wudu." Furthermore, numerous reports state Wudu is a cause for the forgiveness of sins.

Issue 3: Obligation of Wudu for Every Prayer (Repetition)

Dawud al-Zahiri argued that Wudu is obligatory for every prayer. Most jurists disagree.

Dawud's Arguments:

1. Literal Meaning: The phrase "When you rise to prayer" implies either a single instance (which is rejected as ambiguous, as the specific instance isn't defined) or generality (every time one rises). If it were not general, the verse would require external evidence to specify the intended instance, violating the principle that the text should be clear on its own.
2. Implication of the Word: Prayer is service to the Beloved (God). Service requires the highest degree of reverence, which includes being in the utmost state of cleanliness. Renewing Wudu for every prayer is an exaggeration in cleanliness. Linking a ruling (Wudu) immediately after a description (rising for prayer) implies the ruling is based on that description, necessitating generality.

Dawud's Rebuttal to Counterarguments:

• He rejects using the mutawatir (mass-transmitted) reading that mentions being in a state of impurity (hadath) as evidence against his view, as a shadh (irregular) reading cannot overturn the text.
• He rejects using single-chain reports (Khabar al-Wahid) to abrogate the Quran, as this is impermissible.

Jurists' Counterarguments:

• The word "When" (Idha) does not imply repetition. Example: If a husband tells his wife, "When you enter the house, you are divorced," she is divorced only upon the first entry, not subsequent ones. Similarly, a master commanding a servant, "When you enter the market, tell so-and-so..." implies a single instruction.

Al-Razi's Note on Dawud's Divorce Ruling: Al-Razi notes that Dawud might maintain generality in divorce cases, arguing that religious obligations (Takalif) in the Quran are generally built on repetition, unlike the specific scenarios cited (divorce, master's command) where context implies singularity.

Jurists' Evidence (Against Repetition): They cite the report that the Prophet (PBUH) performed all prayers on the Day of the Conquest of Makkah with a single Wudu, stating he did so intentionally.

Dawud's Response to the Hadith:

1. A single report cannot abrogate the Quran.
2. The Prophet's consistent practice of renewing Wudu implies its obligation (Wujub), based on the command to follow him (Fattabi'uhu).
3. Regarding the exception on the Day of Conquest:
   • Preference 1: Renewal might be Sunnah (recommended), and the Prophet increased acts of obedience on that day of grace, rather than decreasing them.
   • Preference 2: Precaution (Ihtiyat) favors renewal (following the saying: "Leave that which causes you doubt for that which does not cause you doubt").
   • Preference 3: The literal meaning of the Quran is superior to a single report.
   • Preference 4: The Quranic evidence is verbal (Qawli), while the hadith evidence is actional (Fi'li); verbal evidence is stronger.

Stronger Argument for the Majority View (No Repetition Required): If Wudu were required for every prayer simply because one rises to pray, then rising would be the sole cause. However, the verse later mentions impurity (passing urine/feces, touching women) leading to Tayammum if water is unavailable. This shows that impurity is a cause for purification (Wudu/Ghusl when water is present), proving that Wudu is not only necessitated by rising for prayer.

Issue 4: Wudu as a Condition for Prayer Validity

The soundest view is that Wudu is a condition for the validity of prayer, based on two points:

1. God linked the performance of prayer to purification with water, and specified that if water is absent, Tayammum must be performed. If Wudu were not a condition, this linkage would be meaningless.
2. God commanded prayer with Wudu. Whoever performs prayer without Wudu has abandoned a commanded prerequisite and deserves punishment; thus, the obligation remains unfulfilled.

Issue 5: Intention (Niyyah) in Wudu

Al-Shafi'i holds that intention is a condition for Wudu validity. Abu Hanifah holds it is not. Both use this verse for evidence.

Al-Shafi'i's Argument:

1. Wudu is commanded (by Ighsilu and Imsahu).
2. Every commanded act must be done with intention (Ikhlas), based on "And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, [being] sincere to Him in religion" (98:5). The Lam here implies causation (Ba'), meaning "by being sincere." Sincerity requires a pure intention (Niyyah Khalisah).
3. Since Wudu is commanded, it requires intention, making intention a condition.

Abu Hanifah's Argument: God commanded washing the specified limbs but did not command intention in the verse. Imposing intention is an addition to the text, which amounts to abrogation (Naskh) by analogy or single report, which is impermissible.

Rebuttal: Al-Shafi'i argues that the necessity of intention was established through Quranic evidence (sincerity).

Issue 6: Order/Sequence (Tartib) in Wudu

Al-Shafi'i holds sequence is a condition. Malik and Abu Hanifah hold it is not.

Al-Shafi'i's Arguments:

1. The conjunction "Fa" (Fa) following the condition (Idha) implies immediate sequence. Since it is attached to washing the face, sequence is required for the face, and by extension, for all subsequent acts (no one differentiates).
   • Counter-rebuttal: If the Fa applies to the whole set of actions ("When you rise, perform all these actions"), then sequence is not specifically mandated.
   • Al-Shafi'i's Reply: The Fa is primarily attached to the face; its application to the rest is secondary. We uphold the primary meaning.
2. The mention of the face first in the text implies it must be performed first in action, based on "So stand firm as you have been commanded" (11:112) and the hadith, "Begin with what Allah began with." (Though this hadith is about Safa and Marwah, the general meaning applies).
3. The order in the verse (washing, wiping, washing) does not match physical sequence (head-to-toe or toe-to-head) nor the logical sequence (grouping washed parts vs. wiped parts). This deviation from expected order implies the stated order is mandatory (Wajib). Neglecting sequence in speech is ugly; thus, God's speech must be pure of it, implying the order is binding.
4. Wudu is not rationally comprehensible (Ghayr Ma'qul al-Ma'na). (Evidence: Impurity exits one place, washing occurs elsewhere; the impure parts are pure according to the verse "The polytheists are only impure" (9:28) and the hadith "The believer is never impure"; purifying the pure is impossible; Tayammum, the substitute, is the opposite of cleanliness; foul water purifies, rosewater does not). Since the meaning is not rational, one must adhere strictly to the textual order, just as one adheres to the order of prayer pillars.

Abu Hanifah's Argument: The conjunction "Waw" (Wa) does not imply sequence; thus, the verse is silent on sequence, and imposing it is an addition/abrogation.

Rebuttal: Al-Shafi'i argues his case based on other textual indicators besides the Waw.

Issue 7: Continuity/Succession (Muwalah) in Wudu

Al-Shafi'i (New Opinion) and Abu Hanifah hold continuity is not a condition. Malik holds it is a condition.

Malik's Argument: God commanded these actions. The obligation is shared whether they are done consecutively or spaced out. Since the verse concludes that this action results in purification ("But Allah intends to purify you"), Wudu without continuity achieves purification, thus permitting prayer (based on the hadith: "The key to prayer is purity").

Issue 8: Things that Nullify Wudu (Excretion)

Abu Hanifah holds that anything exiting the two passages (front and back) nullifies Wudu. Al-Shafi'i holds only recognized impurities (urine/feces) do.

• Abu Hanifah's Evidence: The verse implies Wudu is required for every prayer (as argued in Issue 3). If this general rule is suspended when no impurity exits, it must remain in effect when impurity does exit.
• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: He relies on the hadith that the Prophet (PBUH) performed cupping (Hijamah) and then prayed without renewing Wudu, only washing the bloodstain.

Issue 9: Excretion from Passages (Specific Cases)

Malik holds that non-habitual excretion from the passages (like blood from Istihadah) does not nullify Wudu. Rabi'ah agrees regarding Istihadah blood.

• Evidence: They rely on the general meaning of the verse (implying only major impurities or specific acts nullify it).

Issue 10: Loud Laughter (Qahqaha) in Prayer

Abu Hanifah holds loud laughter in prayer (involving bowing/prostration) nullifies Wudu. Others disagree.

• Abu Hanifah's Evidence: He relies on the general implication of the verse (as argued in Issue 3) that Wudu is required for every prayer, and this act breaks that requirement.

Issue 11: Touching Women

Al-Shafi'i holds touching a woman nullifies Wudu. Abu Hanifah disagrees.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The general implication of the verse, strongly supported by the phrase "or you have touched women (Lamastum al-Nisa')."
• Abu Hanifah's Counter: He relies on a single report (Khabar Wahid) or analogy.

Issue 12: Touching the Private Parts

Al-Shafi'i holds touching the private parts nullifies Wudu. Abu Hanifah disagrees.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The general implication of the verse, confirmed by the hadith: "Whoever touches his private part should perform Wudu." The opposing view relies on a single report or analogy against the general meaning of the Quran.

Issue 13: Washing Impurity While Intending Wudu

If one has physical impurity (Najasa) on the body, washes it, and intends Wudu simultaneously:

• Al-Razi's View: It is sufficient. He fulfilled the command to wash (Ighsilu) and intended the required act. This is supported by "Every man has what he intended."

Issue 14: Standing Under a Downspout (Mizab)

If one stands under a downspout until water flows over them while intending to remove the state of impurity:

• Possibility 1 (No): Wudu requires the action of washing (Ghusl), which standing under the spout is not.
• Possibility 2 (Yes): Washing is defined as an action leading to cleansing. Standing under the spout leads to cleansing, thus constituting washing.

Issue 15: Skin Peeling After Wudu

If the skin covering the limb peels off after washing, revealing unwashed skin underneath:

• The unwashed part is not covered, as the washed part was the outer skin, which has now retracted/fallen off.

Issue 16: Wudu vs. Ghusl (Janaabah)

Washing (Ghusl) in Wudu means passing water over the limb. Simply moistening the limbs without water flowing is insufficient for Wudu.

• Difference from Ghusl (Janaabah): In Janaabah, the command is purification ("But Allah intends to purify you"), which is achieved merely by moistening. In Wudu, the command is washing (Ghusl), which requires flowing water.

Issue 17: Using Snow/Ice

If one rubs snow over the face:

• Permissible: If the air is hot enough to melt the snow and cause water to flow.
• Impermissible: If the air is cold (based on the command for Ghusl). (Disagreement with Malik and Al-Awza'i).

Issue 18: Repeating Acts Three Times (Tathlith)

Repeating each act three times is Sunnah, not obligatory.

• Evidence: The obligation is fulfilled by a single instance of washing, as this fulfills the definition of washing, and the result (purification) is achieved, as stated in "But Allah intends to purify you." The Prophet (PBUH) performed Wudu once, once, once, and said, "This is the Wudu by which Allah accepts prayer."

Issue 19: Siwak (Tooth Stick)

Siwak is Sunnah. Dawud argued it is obligatory.

• Evidence: Siwak is not mentioned in the verse, and purification (which permits prayer) is achieved without it.

Issue 20: Bismillah (Saying God's Name)

Saying "Bismillah" at the start of Wudu is Sunnah. Ahmad and Ishaq held it is obligatory; if omitted intentionally, Wudu is void.

• Evidence: It is not mentioned in the verse, and purification is achieved without it. The hadith states that saying the name purifies the whole body, implying omission purifies only the limbs of Wudu.

Issue 21: Washing Hands Before Wudu

Washing the hands before Wudu is Sunnah, not obligatory (contrary to some views). Evidence is the same as for Siwak and Bismillah.

Issue 22: Definition of the Face (Wajh)

The face extends from the beginning of the forehead to the bottom of the chin vertically, and from ear to ear horizontally. The term Wajh (face) is derived from Muwajaha (confrontation/facing), so all this area must be washed.

Issue 23: Washing Inside the Eyes

Ibn Abbas held washing inside the eye is obligatory because the eye is part of the face.

• Jurists' Counter: The verse concludes: "Allah does not intend to impose hardship upon you." Forcing water into the eye constitutes hardship.

Issue 24: Rinsing the Mouth (Mamdama) and Nose (Istinshaq)

Al-Shafi'i holds they are not obligatory in Wudu or Ghusl. Ahmad and Ishaq hold they are obligatory in both. Abu Hanifah holds they are obligatory in Ghusl but not Wudu.

• Evidence for Non-Obligation: The face is what faces forward (Muwajih). The inside of the mouth and nose are not facing forward and thus are not part of the face. Since washing the four specified limbs results in purification (which permits prayer), and this is achieved without rinsing the mouth/nose, they are not obligatory.

Issue 25: Washing the Area Between the Cheek and Ear

Washing the white area between the cheek (Udhār) and the ear is obligatory for Abu Hanifah, Muhammad, and Al-Shafi'i. Abu Yusuf disagrees.

• Evidence: It is part of the face. Since it must be washed before beard hair grows, the presence of light hair does not remove the obligation, just as the forehead remains obligatory despite eyebrow hair.

Issue 26: Washing Under Light Beard Hair

Al-Shafi'i holds water must reach under a light beard. Abu Hanifah disagrees.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: Washing the face (Wajh) is obligatory. The face is the skin from forehead to chin. When the beard is thick, we omit washing the skin underneath due to hardship (Haraj), based on "He has not placed upon you any difficulty in religion" (22:78). When the beard is light, no hardship exists, so the original obligation (washing the skin) remains.

Issue 27: Washing the Outer Surface of the Beard

Must water reach the hair hanging down past the face line, or the hair extending sideways toward the ears?

• Al-Shafi'i (Two Opinions):
  1. Obligatory.
  2. Not obligatory (Malik, Abu Hanifah, Muzani).
• Al-Shafi'i's Argument (for Obligation): We agree that for a thick beard, the skin underneath is omitted because the outer beard surface is substituted for the skin as the "face." Since the face must be washed completely, the outer surface of the beard must also be washed completely.

Issue 28: Beard on Women

If a woman grows a beard, water must reach the skin of the face, even if the beard is thick.

• Reasoning: The obligation to wash the face (skin) remains. The exemption for men was due to hardship (Haraj), which is rare for women's beards, so they remain on the original ruling.

Areas Where Water Must Reach Under Thick Hair (5 Places): Chin tuft (Unfaqah), eyebrows (Hajibayn), mustache (Shāribayn), cheek hair (Udhārān), and eyelashes (Ahdāb al-'Ayn). This is because the skin underneath is part of the face, and the hardship exemption only applies to the thick beard.

Issue 29: The Ear

Al-Sha'bi counted the front part of the ear as part of the face (to be washed), and the back part as part of the head (to be wiped).

• Al-Razi's View: The ear is not part of the face, as the face is what is confronting.

Issue 30: Washing Up to the Elbows/Ankles

The majority holds washing the arms up to and including the elbows is obligatory, as is the case for the feet up to the ankles. Malik and Zufar argue the boundary itself (Ilā) is excluded.

• Zufar's Evidence: The word "to" (Ilā) denotes the end of the limit, which remains outside the ruled area, like in "then complete the fast until the night" (2:187).

Rebuttal (Two Ways):

1. A boundary can be tangible (like night/day separation) or intangible. The elbow joint is not distinctly separated from the forearm. Since there is no clear physical break, it is more appropriate to include the boundary itself in the washing.
2. Even if the elbow itself is excluded, the term elbow (Mirfaq) refers to the point used for leaning/resting, which is beyond the bone end. If the bone end must be touched, the other bone end must also be touched.

Issue 31: Amputations

If the arm is amputated:

• If amputated below the elbow, the remaining part up to the elbow must be washed.
• If amputated above the elbow, nothing is required, as the location of the obligation no longer exists.
• If amputated at the elbow: Al-Shafi'i requires touching the bone end, as the elbow joint (meeting of two bones) was obligatory to wash.

Issue 32: Washing Right Before Left

Washing the right limb before the left is Sunnah, not obligatory. Ahmad held it is obligatory.

• Evidence: The verse mentions hands and feet generally without specifying the order of the right limb over the left.

Issue 33: Pouring Water

It is Sunnah to pour water over the hand so it flows down to the elbow. If water is poured over the elbow so it flows down to the hand:

• Some say this is impermissible as the elbow is made the end (Ghāyah), not the beginning.
• The majority says it does not invalidate Wudu but is a dereliction of Sunnah.

Issue 34: Extra Limbs

If extra forearms and hands grow from the elbow, they must all be washed up to the elbow, based on the generality of "and your forearms to the elbows." Similarly, an extra finger on the hand must be washed.

Issue 35: The Limit (Ilā)

The phrase "to the elbows" defines the limit of the command (the extent of washing), not the nature of the act itself. The required washing is limited to this extent, but the act of washing itself is not limited, as reports confirm extending the washing slightly beyond the boundary (Ghurra) is a confirmed Sunnah.

Issue 36: Wiping the Head (Mas'h)

Al-Shafi'i: The minimum amount called "wiping the head" is required. Malik: Wiping the entire head is required. Abu Hanifah: Wiping one-quarter of the head is required.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: If one says, "I wiped the cloth," it implies wiping the whole thing. But if one says, "I wiped my hand with the cloth," wiping a part suffices. Similarly, "Wipe over your heads" requires wiping a part of the head with the hand. Since the verse does not specify the measure, imposing a specific measure would require external evidence, making the verse ambiguous—which is against the principle. Therefore, wiping any part suffices.

Issue 37: Wiping Over Head Coverings (Imamah)

Wiping over a turban is not permissible (Al-Awza'i, Thawri, Ahmad permitted it).

• Evidence: The verse mandates wiping the head itself; wiping the turban is not wiping the head.
• Rebuttal: Perhaps the Prophet (PBUH) wiped the obligatory minimum on the head and the rest on the turban.

Issue 38: Washing vs. Wiping the Feet

There is disagreement:

• Wiping (Mas'h): Ibn Abbas, Anas, 'Ikrimah, Sha'bi, Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir, and the Imami Shi'a hold wiping is obligatory.
• Washing (Ghusl): The majority of jurists hold washing is obligatory.
• Combination: Dawud al-Isfahani and some Zaydi Imams hold both are required.
• Choice: Al-Hasan al-Basri and Al-Tabari hold the person has a choice.

Argument for Wiping (Based on Readings):

1. Genitive Reading (Jar): (Wa-arjulakum - with a kasra on the Lam), read by Ibn Kathir, Hamzah, Abu Amr, and 'Asim (in one narration). This reading makes the feet (Arjul) grammatically connected (Ma'tuf) to the heads (Ru'usukum), which were wiped. Thus, wiping is required for the feet too.
   • Rebuttal to 'Neighboring Kasra' (Kasr 'ala al-Jiwar): This is rejected because it is only used when ambiguity is avoided (like in "a ruined den of a lizard"), which is not the case here. Also, neighboring kasra usually occurs without a conjunction (Waw).
2. Accusative Reading (Nasb): (Wa-arjulakum - with a fathah on the Lam), read by Nafi', Ibn 'Amir, and 'Asim (in Hafs' narration). This reading allows the feet to be connected either to the verb "Wipe" (Imsahu) (as a secondary object of wiping) or to the verb "Wash" (Ighsilu). Since the nearer verb (Imsahu) is preferred, the reading implies wiping.

Conclusion for Wiping Advocates: Both readings support wiping. They reject counter-reports because they are single reports, which cannot abrogate the Quran.

Rebuttal (For Washing):

1. Numerous reports mandate washing. Washing encompasses wiping, but wiping does not encompass washing. Therefore, washing is more precautionary and should be followed.
2. The limit "to the ankles" (Ilā al-Ka'bayn) is mentioned for washing, not wiping.
   • Counter-Rebuttal: The ankle limit applies to wiping too (by wiping the top of the foot up to the ankle bone, or the two prominent ankle bones).

Issue 39: Definition of the Ankles (Ka'bayn)

The majority holds the ankles are the two prominent bones on the sides of the leg. The Imami Shi'a and those favoring wiping hold the ankle is the round bone located at the joint between the leg and the foot (like the hock of cattle).

Majority Arguments (For Prominent Bones):

1. If it were the round bone, there would only be one ankle per leg, but the text uses the dual "ankles" (Ka'bayn), paralleling the dual "elbows" (Marāfiq).
2. The round bone is obscure, known only to anatomists. The prominent bones are obvious to everyone, and public religious rulings must rely on obvious matters.
3. Hadith evidence: The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Make the ankle touch the ankle-bone (Ka'ib)," referring to the prominent bones.
4. Linguistically, Ka'b relates to prominence and elevation.

Imami Argument (For Round Bone): The term Ka'b applies to that specific bone in all animals, and joints (Ku'ub) are called Ka'b (like the joints of a spear).

Conclusion: The ruling must rely on the most apparent feature, which are the prominent bones.

Issue 40: Wiping Over Leather Socks (Khuffayn)

The majority permits wiping over socks. The Shi'a and Khawarij forbid it.

• Opponents' Argument: The verse mandates either washing or wiping the feet. Wiping over socks is neither washing nor wiping the feet themselves, so it is impermissible based on the text. Relying on hadith to abrogate the Quran is invalid. Furthermore, the Sura Al-Ma'idah is generally considered un-abrogated. If the hadith preceded the verse, the hadith is abrogated by the Quran. If the hadith followed, it abrogates the Quran (which is less likely). The Quranic text is stronger than single reports. The widespread need for this ruling implies it should have reached the level of mass transmission (Tawātur) if it were valid.

• Jurists' Argument (For Permission): Some Companions permitted it, and no widespread denial from the rest is recorded, implying consensus (Ijma'). Reports state seventy Companions confirmed the Prophet wiped over his socks. Ibn Abbas, who initially denied it, later retracted, saying, "He lied about me." Aisha, upon being asked, referred the questioner to Ali, who confirmed wiping.

Issue 41: Amputees

If a person is amputated in both hands and feet, the obligations for those limbs fall away. If they cannot find someone to perform Wudu/Tayammum for them, that too falls away, as the command is conditional upon ability.

"And if you are in a state of major ritual impurity (Junub), then purify yourselves [by bathing]." (Fatahharrū)

• Linguistic Note: Fatahharrū (purify yourselves) is pronounced Ittahhirū due to the assimilation (Idghām) of the Tā' into the Tā' (both from the same articulation point), requiring an initial connecting vowel (Alif al-Wasl).

This section discusses the major purification following the minor one (Wudu).

Issue 1: Causes of Janaabah

1. Ejaculation of semen (Nuzūl al-Manī), based on the hadith: "Indeed, water is from water."
2. The meeting of the two circumcised parts (Iltiqā' al-Khintāyn). Zayd ibn Thabit, Mu'adh, and Abu Sa'id al-Khudri held that Ghusl is only required upon ejaculation.

(Detailed anatomical description of male and female circumcision follows, omitted for brevity).

Issue 2: Scope of the Command to Purify

The command "then purify yourselves" (Fatahharrū) is absolute, not restricted to a specific limb. Since purification for Wudu was restricted to specific limbs, the lack of restriction here implies purification of the entire body. This purification is Ghusl, as confirmed elsewhere: "...until you have bathed." (4:43).

Issue 3: Rubbing (Dalk) in Ghusl

Rubbing is not obligatory in Ghusl (Malik held it is obligatory).

• Evidence: The command is to purify the body. Purification does not require rubbing, as the Prophet (PBUH) stated when asked about Ghusl: "As for me, I pour three handfuls of water lightly over my head, and then I am purified." This proves purification occurs without rubbing.

Issue 4: Touching the Qur'an while Junub

It is not permissible for a Junub person to touch the Mushaf (physical copy of the Qur'an). Dawud permitted it.

• Evidence: The command "then purify yourselves" implies the Junub person is not pure. If they were pure, the command would be to purify the pure, which is impossible. Since they are not pure, they cannot touch the Mushaf, based on "None shall touch it except the purified ones" (56:79).

Issue 5: Preceding Wudu with Ghusl

Wudu is not required before Ghusl (Abu Thawr and Dawud held it is required).

• Evidence: The command is purification, achieved by Ghusl alone, as evidenced by the Prophet's practice of pouring water over his head without prior Wudu.

Issue 6: Rinsing Mouth and Nose in Ghusl

Al-Shafi'i holds they are not obligatory. Abu Hanifah holds they are obligatory.

• Abu Hanifah's Evidence:
  • Verse: "then purify yourselves" commands purifying the self. Self-purification requires purifying all parts of the self. Since the inside of the mouth and nose can be purified, they remain under the general command.
  • Hadith: "Wet the hair and cleanse the skin, for under every hair is Janaabah." "Wet the hair" includes the inside of the nose, and "cleanse the skin" includes the skin inside the mouth.

Issue 7: Head Hair in Ghusl

If the hair is braided/twisted (Maftūl), one must undo it if it prevents water from reaching the scalp. Malik disagreed unless the braiding prevents water penetration.

• Evidence: The command is to deliver water to all parts of the body. If braiding prevents this, it must be removed.

Issue 8: Sequence in Ghusl

The majority holds no sequence is required in Ghusl. Ishaq held starting from the top of the body is obligatory.

• Evidence: The command "then purify yourselves" is an absolute command for purification, achieved by delivering water to the entire body, regardless of order.

"But if you are ill or on a journey, or one of you comes from relieving himself, or you have touched women and find no water, then seek clean earth [for Tayammum]..." (4:43)

Issue 1: Condition for Tayammum

Tayammum is permissible for the sick or traveler based on the verse. It is not conditional on the absence of water, as the absence of water is a separate permission. The phrase "and find no water" applies specifically to the traveler.

Issue 2: Categories of Illness Permitting Tayammum

1. Fear of Harm/Destruction: Permitted by consensus.
2. No Fear of Harm/Destruction: Al-Shafi'i says no. Malik and Dawud say yes, as the term "ill" (Marīd) is general.
3. Fear of Worsening or Slowing Recovery: Permitted by the soundest opinion (Al-Shafi'i's later opinion, Malik, Abu Hanifah), based on the generality of "ill."
4. Fear of Scarring/Disfigurement: Al-Shafi'i (New Opinion) says no. (Old Opinion, sounder view): Yes, as it aligns with the verse.

Issue 3: Partial Illness

If illness affects only part of the body:

• Al-Shafi'i: Wash the healthy parts and perform Tayammum for the injured part. (Based on precaution).
• Abu Hanifah: If the majority of the body is healthy, wash it without Tayammum. If the majority is injured, Tayammum suffices. (Based on the illness being a cause for permission).

Issue 4: Obstruction on the Body

If something prevents water from reaching the skin (e.g., a bandage) and removing it causes no harm:

• Al-Shafi'i: Must remove the bandage for Tayammum to be valid.
• Majority: Not required. (Based on the principle of ease and removing hardship: "Allah intends no hardship for you" (22:78)). Imposing removal is hardship.

Issue 5: Short Journeys

Tayammum is permissible in short journeys. Some later Shafi'i scholars disagreed.

• Evidence: The term "journey" (Safar) is absolute and not specified as long or short. If short travel is excluded, then mild illness should also be excluded, which is contrary to the text. Ibn Umar's action of performing Tayammum near Madinah (when the city walls were visible) supports this.

Issue 6: Having Water but Fearing Thirst

If a traveler has water but fears thirst for himself or others, Tayammum is permissible.

• Reasoning: The obligation to preserve life/health overrides the obligation of Wudu. If water is too expensive to buy, Wudu is not required; self-harm is a stronger reason for exemption.

Issue 7: Water Reserved for Thirsty Animals

If water is available but needed for a dying animal, Tayammum is permissible.

• Reasoning: The right of the animal takes precedence over prayer in this extreme case. The water is effectively non-existent for the person's obligation.

Issue 8: Water Available at Exorbitant Price (Ghabn Fāhish)

If water is available but must be bought at an exorbitant price, Tayammum is permissible.

• Reasoning: The principle of removing hardship lifts the burden of paying an excessive price. If the price is fair, water must be bought.

Issue 9: Water Offered as a Gift

If water is offered as a gift, Tayammum is permissible; accepting the gift is not obligatory.

• Al-Razi's Critique: He wonders why accepting a gift (which involves the burden of obligation/favor, Mannah) is considered a hardship justifying Tayammum, while fear of pain in illness is not treated with the same weight.

Issue 10: Borrowing Water Equipment (Dalu and Rishā')

If only the bucket and rope are available for borrowing, most say Tayammum is not permissible.

• Reasoning: Borrowing equipment involves little burden (Mannah), so the person is considered able to find water without hardship, thus invalidating the condition for Tayammum.

Issue 11: "Coming from Relieving Himself"

This is a euphemism for relieving oneself. Most scholars include all excretion from the two passages, whether habitual or rare, based on supporting hadith.

Issue 12: Istinja' (Cleaning After Excretion)

Al-Shafi'i holds cleaning with three stones (or water) is obligatory. Abu Hanifah holds it is not obligatory.

• Abu Hanifah's Evidence: The verse mandates Wudu or Tayammum upon exiting feces/urine or touching women, but does not mandate washing the site of impurity, implying it is not obligatory.

Issue 13: Touching Women (Nullification)

Al-Shafi'i holds it nullifies Wudu; Abu Hanifah disagrees (see Issue 11).

Issue 14: Touching Women (The Touched Person)

The nullification of the toucher's Wudu is derived from the verse. The nullification of the touched person's Wudu is derived from hadith or analogy.

This section covers two types of issues: what water is considered purifying, and the nature of Tayammum.

Type 1: Issues Concerning Water

Issue 1: Using Heated Water Using water heated by the sun is permissible and not disliked (contrary to Mujahid).

• Evidence: It fulfills the command to pass water over the limb. Also, Tayammum is permitted only when water is not found; heated water is still water.

Issue 2: Water Intentionally Heated by Sun Our companions dislike using water intentionally heated by the sun. Abu Hanifah and Ahmad do not dislike it.

• Dislike Argument: Based on a hadith warning against using sun-heated water if affliction follows. Some say this is a medical, not religious, dislike.
• Permissibility Argument: It fulfills the command to wash, and the person has found water, so Tayammum is not permitted.

Issue 3: Water Leftover from a Polytheist's Wudu It is permissible to use water leftover from a polytheist's Wudu or water in their vessels. Ahmad and Ishaq disagreed.

• Evidence: The command to wash is fulfilled, and the person has found water, so Tayammum is invalid. Reports confirm the Prophet (PBUH) used water from a polytheist's waterskin.

Issue 4: Sea Water Sea water is permissible for Wudu. Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As disagreed.

• Evidence: It fulfills the command to wash, and the condition for Tayammum (absence of water) is not met.

Issue 5: Date Vinegar (Nabīdh al-Tamr) Al-Shafi'i says it is not permissible for Wudu. Abu Hanifah permits it during travel.

• Al-Shafi'i's Argument: The verse mandates Tayammum when water is absent. If one can use date vinegar instead, they are abandoning Tayammum when they should be performing it. The story of the Jinn using Nabidh is explained as water with dates added to remove saltiness, or it is abrogated by the later Sura Al-Ma'idah.

Issue 6: All Pure Liquids Al-Awza'i and Al-Asamm permit Wudu with all pure liquids. The majority forbids it.

• Majority Argument: If other liquids sufficed, God would not have mandated Tayammum when water is absent.
• Opponents' Argument: Ighsilu (washing) is a general term for passing a liquid over the limb.

Issue 7: Water Heavily Altered by Saffron Al-Shafi'i says water heavily altered by saffron is not permissible for Wudu. Abu Hanifah permits it.

• Al-Shafi'i's Argument: Such water is not truly called "water," so the user has not found water and must perform Tayammum.
• Abu Hanifah's Argument: The water still exists as water, merely described by a quality (saffron). Since water was found, Tayammum is invalid.

Issue 8: Stale/Putrid Water Water that has become stale due to long sitting remains pure and purifying.

• Evidence: Tayammum is conditioned on the absence of water. Stale water is still water.

Issue 9: Used Water (Musta'mal) Malik and Dawud hold used water remains pure and purifying (Old view of Shafi'i). New view of Shafi'i and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan hold it remains pure but is no longer purifying (Ṭahūr). Abu Hanifah holds it becomes impure in most narrations.

• Malik's Argument: Tayammum is conditioned on the absence of water. Used water is still water, so Tayammum is invalid. If Tayammum is invalid, Wudu must be permissible. Furthermore, the term Ṭahūr (purifying agent) implies repeatability, which is only possible if used water can be used again.

Issue 10: Water Contaminated by Impurity Without Change Malik holds if impurity falls into water (little or much) without changing its taste, smell, or color, it remains pure and purifying. Most Companions and Successors held this.

• Al-Shafi'i: If less than two Qullatayn (large containers), it becomes impure. Abu Hanifah: If less than 10x10 units, it becomes impure.
• Malik's Argument: The condition for Tayammum is the absence of water. This water is present, so Tayammum is invalid. The general command to wash applies, and we only restrict it where change occurs (which is not the case here).

Issue 11: Water Leftover from Junub It is permissible to use water leftover from a Junub person's Ghusl. Ahmad and Ishaq disagreed regarding water leftover from a woman bathing alone.

• Evidence: Water was found, so Tayammum is invalid, and Wudu must be performed.

Issue 12: Saliva of Beasts of Prey and Donkeys The saliva of beasts of prey and donkeys is pure and purifying. Abu Hanifah held it is impure.

• Evidence: The saliva is water, so Tayammum is invalid.

Issue 13: Water Reaching Two Qullatayn with Impurity If water reaches two Qullatayn and impurity falls in but does not change it, it remains pure and purifying (Al-Shafi'i). Abu Hanifah holds it becomes impure.

• Al-Shafi'i's Argument: Water was found, so Tayammum is invalid. The command to wash is fulfilled.

Issue 14: Water Mixed with Leaves This verse indicates that as long as the water retains the name "absolute water" (al-Mā' al-Muṭlaq), it is pure and purifying.

Issue 1: Intention in Tayammum Intention is necessary (Shafi'i, Abu Hanifah, Majority). Zufar disagreed.

• Evidence: The command "then seek clean earth" (Fatayamammu) implies intention, as Tayammum means intending/directing.

Issue 2: Extent of Wiping the Hands Shafi'i/Abu Hanifah: Up to the elbows. Ali/Ibn Abbas: Up to the wrists. Malik: Up to the knuckles. Zuhri: Up to the armpits.

• Argument for Elbows: The word "hands" (Aydīkum) generally refers to the limb up to the armpit. However, Tayammum is a substitute based on ease, replacing four washed limbs with wiping two limbs. This ease is confirmed by "Allah intends no hardship for you." Since the arms (Adhudayn) are excluded from Wudu (washing), they are more likely excluded from Tayammum. Thus, the limit remains up to the elbows.

Issue 3: Coverage of the Limbs The entire limb must be wiped. Hasan ibn Ziyad narrated from Abu Hanifah that wiping the majority suffices.

• Argument for Full Coverage: "Wipe over your faces and your hands from it" (Min-hu). The word Min implies taking from the whole.

Issue 4: Dust Adhering to the Hand Al-Shafi'i/Abu Yusuf: If no dust adheres to the hand when striking the earth, it is invalid. Abu Hanifah/Malik: It is sufficient.

• Argument for Adherence: The word "from it" (Min-hu) implies taking some of that dust.
• Argument for Sufficiency: The command is to wipe with the earth.

Issue 5: Type of Earth Al-Shafi'i/Abu Yusuf: Only pure dust (Turāb) is valid. Abu Hanifah: Dust, sand, crushed pottery, gypsum, and lime are valid.

• Argument for Dust Only: Ibn Abbas said Ṣa'īd means dust. Since Tayammum is not rationally comprehensible, one must stick to the literal text, which mentions dust.

Issue 6: Dust Carried by Wind If wind blows dust onto the limbs, and one wipes over it:

• Al-Shafi'i's apparent view: Insufficient.
• Some verifiers: Sufficient, as the dust reached the limbs, and the intention to use the clean earth was present.

Issue 7: Someone Else Performing Tayammum It is valid for someone else to perform Tayammum for you. Some say it is invalid because the command is "then seek clean earth [for yourselves]" (Fatayamammu).

Issue 8: Timing of Tayammum Al-Shafi'i: Only after the prayer time begins. Abu Hanifah: Permissible before the time begins.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The condition for Tayammum is linked to the condition for prayer: "When you rise to prayer..."

Issue 9: Striking the Leg to Raise Dust Abu Hanifah: Permissible to use the dust raised by striking the leg. Abu Yusuf: Impermissible.

• Abu Yusuf's Evidence: "then seek clean earth." Dust separated from the earth is not called "clean earth."

Issue 10: Impure Earth Tayammum is not valid with impure earth, based on "clean earth" (Ṣa'īdan Ṭayyiban).

Issue 11: Searching for Water Al-Shafi'i: If water is not found nearby, one must search right and left, descend into valleys, and ascend mountains before performing Tayammum. Abu Hanifah: If one strongly believes water is absent, searching is not required.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The condition is "and find no water," which implies the completion of searching.

Issue 12: Timing of Searching Searching is only required after the prayer time begins. If searched before, it must be repeated after the time starts, unless certainty remains that the situation hasn't changed.

Issue 13: Tayammum for Janaabah There is no dispute that Tayammum substitutes for Wudu. For Janaabah (Ghusl), Ali and Ibn Abbas permitted it, as did the majority. Umar and Ibn Mas'ud forbade it.

• Permissibility Evidence: The verse mentions touching women (Lamastum al-Nisā'), which implies sexual contact leading to Janaabah, thus permitting Tayammum if water is absent.

Issue 14: Combining Prayers with Tayammum Al-Shafi'i: One cannot combine two obligatory prayers with one Tayammum (unlike Wudu). Ahmad: Can combine missed prayers, but not prayers of two different times.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The verse implies a specific purification for each prayer time (Wudu if water is found, Tayammum if not). This was waived for Wudu by the Prophet's action, but remains for Tayammum based on the literal text.

Issue 15: Timing of Tayammum When Water is Expected Al-Shafi'i: If water is not found at the start of the time but is expected later, Tayammum is permissible at the start. Abu Hanifah: Must delay the prayer until the end of the time.

• Al-Shafi'i's Evidence: The phrase "When you rise to prayer" refers to the entry of the time, implying that if water is absent upon entry, Tayammum is permitted.

Issue 16: Finding Water After Tayammum but Before Prayer If water is found after Tayammum but before starting the prayer, the Tayammum is void.

• Evidence: The condition for starting prayer with Tayammum is the absence of water. Finding water negates this condition.

Issue 17: Finding Water During Prayer If water is found during the prayer, the prayer does not need to be repeated (Malik, Ahmad). Abu Hanifah and Thawri disagreed.

• Evidence: The initial commencement of prayer with Tayammum was valid due to the absence of water. The prayer is established as correct. Since the prayer is not invalidated until one becomes capable of using water, and capability is dependent on the prayer being completed (a circular dependency), the prayer remains valid.

Issue 18: Forgetting Water If one forgets water is in their luggage, performs Tayammum, and then remembers:

• Opinion 1 (Shafi'i's later view, Ahmad, Abu Yusuf): Must repeat the prayer, as the forgetfulness is not an accepted excuse.
• Opinion 2 (Malik, Abu Hanifah): Does not need to repeat. Forgetting is a form of inability (Ajz), placing them under the ruling of "and find no water."

Issue 19: Lost Luggage If luggage is lost, the same disagreement applies; the first opinion (no repetition) is preferred.

Issue 20: Forgetting Water After Thorough Search If one searches exhaustively, finds nothing, performs Tayammum, prays, and then finds the water:

• Majority: Repetition is required, as the excuse (forgetting) is weak.
• Minority: No repetition, as the exhaustive search made them effectively unable to use water.

Issue 21: Finding Water in a Nearby Well If one prays with Tayammum and then finds water in a nearby well:

• If they knew about it and forgot: Repeat (like Issue 18).
• If they never knew about it: If it had a clear sign, repeat. If no sign, no repetition, as they were unable to use it.

"Allah intends no hardship for you, but He intends to purify you and to complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful."

Issue 1: The Meaning of God's Will (Murīd)

All Imams agree God wills, but they differ on the meaning:

• Hasan al-Najjar (Negative Definition): Will means He is not overpowered or coerced. (A negative attribute).
• Mu'tazila (Jahiz, Ka'bi, Basri): Will for His own actions means the incentive (Dā'ī) moved Him to create them. Will for others' actions means the incentive moved Him to command them.
• Majority (Affirmative Attribute): Will is an attribute added to knowledge (the incentive). Some say He wills by an eternal will; others say by a created will.

Issue 2: Prohibition of Burdening Beyond Capacity

The Mu'tazila argue this verse proves that commanding what is impossible (Taklīf mā lā yuṭāq) does not occur, as it is the severest form of hardship. Our scholars reply that since the opposite is known to be impossible (i.e., God commanding the impossible), their premise is accepted.

Issue 3: Foundational Principles of Shari'ah

This verse is a major foundation:

1. The Principle of No Harm: Harm is not legislated (supported by this verse, 2:185, and the hadith: "No harm nor reciprocal harm in Islam").
2. The Principle of Permissibility of Benefits: Benefits are permissible by default (supported by 2:29: "He created for you all that is in the earth," and 5:4: "All good things have been made lawful for you").

If these two principles are established, analogy (Qiyās) is unnecessary: any new event is either harmful (and thus forbidden) or beneficial (and thus permissible). Any analogy contradicting these textual principles is rejected.

Issue 4: The Meaning of Purification (Li-Yuṭahhirakum)

1. Physical Purity (Rejected View): Some Hanafi scholars say it removes the legal impurity (Najāsa Ḥukmiyyah) caused by the state of impurity (Ḥadath). This is rejected because:
   • The verse states: "The polytheists are only impure" (9:28), implying believers are never impure.
   • The hadith states: "The believer is never impure, alive or dead."
   • The body of the impure person does not transfer impurity to a wet garment or a person carrying them in prayer.
   • Purity laws differ across dispensations.
   • Impurity exiting one place cannot taint another.
   • Tayammum (the preceding act) removes cleanliness, not physical impurity.
   • Wiping over socks replaces washing, and wiping removes no physical impurity.
   • If the removed thing were physical, sensation would prove it; if it were an attribute, the transfer of attributes is impossible.

2. Spiritual Purity (The Correct View): It means purification of the heart from the attribute of rebellion against obedience to God. Sin and disbelief are impurities of the spirit. Just as physical removal of filth is called purification, removing corrupt beliefs and false morals is also called purification. This is supported by verses about the impurity of polytheists and the purification of the Prophet's household.

When God commands washing clean limbs, the servant obeys purely to demonstrate servitude. This obedience removes the traces of rebellion from the heart, which is the true purification.

On Completing the Favor (Wa-Liyutimma Ni'matahu 'Alaykum)

1. It relates to the entire Surah: God first favored with permissible foods/marriage (worldly favor), and now with Wudu (religious favor).
2. It refers to the concession of Tayammum and ease during travel/illness, implying God will complete His favor on the Day of Judgment by pardoning sins.

On Gratitude (La'allakum Tashkurūn)

The discussion on the word La'alla (perhaps/that) is covered in the commentary on Surah Al-Baqarah (2:21).

Verse 7: And remember the favor of Allah upon you and His covenant by which He bound you when you said, "We heard and obeyed." And fear Allah. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of that within the breasts.