Differences between Shia and Sunnī Muslims in the manner of performing the ritual ablutions (wuḍūʾ)

Regarding the differences between Shia and Sunnī Muslims as to the manner of performing wuḍūʾ, some reformist thinkers say that the interpretation of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) is the best interpretation but not the only valid one. According to them, the Quran is the greater of the thaqalayn, not in terms of spiritual rank, but as an interpretive model, because the Quran’s role is to describe the essence, and the Ahl al-Bayt (a) interpret it in their context, and that the Ahl al-Bayt (a) are lesser to the Quran in aḥkām, but not in morality and theology. Therefore, regarding wuḍūʾ, Imām al-Ṣādiq (a) demonstrated the washing to be from up to down. However, reformists question how people were doing wuḍūʾ for 150 years after the Prophet (saw)?! They, therefore, conclude that both methods of performing ablutions are valid.

Wuḍūʾ of the Shia and Sunni denominations differs, in that according to Shia fiqh, one washes their face, and then their two hands, followed by wiping a part of their head, and the top of their feet, (i.e., two washes and two wipings). On the other hand, in Sunni fiqh, wuḍūʾ comprises washing the face and then the hands, followed by wiping the head and ears, and finally, washing the two feet, (i.e., a total of three washes and one wiping).

One of the points of disagreement between Shia and Sunnī Muslims with regard to Islamic law, is the method of performing wuḍūʾ. Shias believe that you should wipe your feet (as you do with your head) in wuḍūʾ, while Sunnis believe that you should wash your feet (as you do with your hands). The source of this disagreement between the two schools is their divergent readings of the Quranic verse 5:6, which enjoins the faithful to perform ablutions before prayer:

“O you who have faith! When you stand up for prayer, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet up to the ankles.”31

The crux of the disagreement is the reading of the phrase ‘your feet’ (arjulakum), which Shia scholars say is joined to the grammatical position (maḥall) of the phrase ‘a part of your heads’ (bi-ruʾūsikum), which is that of the object (mafʿūl) of the verb ‘wipe.’ By contrast, Sunnī scholars argue that it is joined to the phrase ‘your faces’ (wujūhakum), which is the object of the verb ‘wash.’ However, the phrase ‘a part of your heads’ occurs immediately before ‘your feet,’ whereas there is a significant gap between ‘your faces’ and ‘your feet.’ This points to ‘your feet’ being joined to ‘a part of your heads’ rather than ‘your faces,’ meaning that it is the object of the command to ‘wipe’ rather than the command to ‘wash.’ So it is not correct to wash one’s feet in the same manner as one’s hands.32

In Al-Mīzān, Al-ʿAllāma al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains the interpretation of the aforementioned verse according to Shias, saying:

‘Dear reader, imagine that you heard someone say this without any preconceptions in your mind about what it means or paying any attention to what others have said about it. If you hear someone say this, you will immediately conclude that the phrase “your feet” is joined to the phrase ‘a part of your heads.’ Now, while the word ruʾūs (‘heads’) appears to be genitive (majrūr) because it follows a preposition (bi ruʾūsikum), however, the position of the phrase bi-ruʾūsikum (‘a part of your heads’) as a whole, is accusative (manṣūb), because it is the object of the verb ‘and wipe’ (imsaḥū). Therefore, because the grammatical position of the entire phrase ‘a part of your heads’ is accusative, this means that ‘your feet’ (arjulakum) should also be accusative, because it is joined to it. At that, from this verse, we understand that in wuḍūʾ it is obligatory to wash one’s hands and face, and to wipe one’s head and feet. It is quite inconceivable to anyone with good sense that an eloquent speaker such as God would intend any meaning other than this. Even in everyday speech, if someone were to say, ‘I kissed so-and-so’s head and face, and I touched his shoulder and his hand,’ you could not argue that ‘and his hand’ was joined to anything other than the phrase immediately preceding it, namely ‘ and I touched his shoulder.’33

Therefore, the phrase ‘your feet,’ (arjulakum) is accusative because it is joined to the position of the phrase ‘a part of your heads’ (bi-ruʾūsikum). Some Sunnī authors have even acknowledged that the apparent meaning of the verse is that ‘your feet’ is joined to ‘a part of your heads,’ but because of the interpretation of some early scholars and narrations ‘attributed’ to the Prophet (saw), the faithful should wash their feet when performing wuḍūʾ.34

According to the narrations of the Prophet’s Household (a), the Prophet used to wiped his feet along with his head in wuḍūʾ, and any accounts narrated contrary to this are not authentic (or, if their chain is authentic, they would have to be discarded because of either dissimulation (taqiyya), contradiction with the famous opinion in the narrations Ahl al-Bayt (shuhra) or with the Holy Quran (mukhālafa bi al-Quran).

The Infallibles (a) always performed wuḍūʾ by washing their faces and hands and wiping their heads and feet. There are even narrations from them, which say that if someone washes their feet instead of wiping them, his wuḍūʾ is invalid and he must repeat it, wiping his feet this time, before he can pray.35[5]

Equally, it is narrated from Imām al-Riḍā (a): ‘Jibrīl came down to Allah’s Messenger (saw) with two washings and two wipings: Washing the face, and [the] forearms with one palm [washing] the other, and wiping the head and two feet with the moisture that remains upon the hands.’36

Another tradition relates that Imām al-Ṣādiq (a) said: ‘Wipe the front of your heads, and wipe both of your feet, beginning with the right side.’37

Ibn ʿAbbās narrates that the Prophet (saw) would wipe his feet in wuḍūʾ, just as he would wipe his head, and the Imāms (a) also performed wuḍūʾ in this manner.38

Therefore, the only form of wuḍūʾ that can be valid and correct is the one performed in this manner, not one in which the believer washes their feet.39

As for the argument that the Quran represents the essence of the religion and the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) represent its form, it is interesting to consider that, according to the Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn (Tradition of the Two Weighty Things), to be guided means to follow the Quran and the Ahl al-Bayt (a) together, (“that which, if you hold on to together, you will never go astray“…mā in tamassaktum bihimā lan taḍillū baʿdī…). Therefore, even if we consider the teachings of the Prophet’s Household (a) as the form of the Quranic essence, we are still obliged to follow that specific form, rather than abandoning it and going astray, because they were divinely guided and knew how best to express that essence, and in which prescribed form. Therefore, the claim that ‘the interpretation of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) is the best interpretation but not the only valid one’ is in direct contradiction with Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn, which is mass-narrated successively in both Shia and Sunnī sources.40

The role of the Prophet (saw) and the Ahl al-Bayt (a) with relation to the verses of the Quran is to explain them, as indicated in the Quran:

“[We sent them] with manifest proofs and scriptures. We have sent down the reminder to you so that you may clarify for the people that which has been sent down to them, so that they may reflect.”41

Al-ʿAllāma al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains that according to this verse, the Holy Prophet (saw), and by extension through Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn, also the Ahl al-Bayt (a), can expound not only the unspecific/esoteric verses (mutashābiha), but also the explicit verses. Furthermore, this verse doesn’t allow for the validity of expositions by non-maʿsūm scholars, or rather even Prophetic Companions, or their following generation (tābʿīn). Of course, this validity only applies to narrations, which are authenticated either by (tawātur) or by the standards of a single report with indications as to its authenticity (khabar al-wāḥid, al-qaṭʿiyy al-ṣudūr, al-maḥfūf bi al-qarāʾin).

In other words, whatever has been narrated from them is an exposition of the meaning of Quran’s verses, and it is not permitted to stray from this. Also, even though the Companions have been considered by Muslims as religious authorities to be followed as they had access to the Holy Prophet (saw) based on several narrations, they attribute to him (saw) – such as the narration of his Companions being like stars, and whichever of them one were to follow, they would be guided – however, our Shia theologians disagree with this reported narration for instance, because it contradicts with the verse 33:33 of the Holy Quran, and in fact is self-contradictory.

In other words, the Ahl al-Bayt (a) complement and clarify the Quran. This is something we can clearly see with the ordinance of prayer: There are verses in the Quran, which emphasise the obligatory character of prayer, but the explanation of how to perform prayer came from the Prophet (saw), and everyone is obliged to follow the method he laid down for them. To discard the Prophetic model of prayer is forbidden, as he said: “Pray in the manner you see me praying”42. Therefore, based on this imperative, no other form of prayer is valid. The Quran says:

“It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.”43

Therefore, the correct way to perform wuḍūʾ or offer prayers, and other similar rituals is how the Messenger of Allah (saw) taught the faithful to do them, and the Prophet’s Household (a) are the preservers and transmitters of his teachings.

This is true whether we consider their teachings to be the outward form of the inward Quranic essence, or we see them as the explainers and interpreters of the Quran’s verses.44