There is no Salat without Wudu. However as explicit as the verse of Wudu is in the Quran, it has become another point of heated debate between Shia and Sunni.

# Sunni submits we must wash our feet in Wudu and not wipe.

# Shia submits we must WIPE our feet in Wudu and not wash

I intend to re-open this "dialogue of Wudu" with this thread. This is expected to be academic. Derailing, insulting should be avoided please.
............................... ....................

QURANIC COMMAND
Surah al-Maidah: 6

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ وَإِن كُنتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُوا وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَىٰ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِّنكُم مِّنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لَامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم مِّنْهُ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَٰكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ

"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. If you are junub, purify yourselves. But if you are sick, or on a journey, or any of you has come from the toilet, or you have touched women, and you cannot find water, then make tayammum with clean ground and wipe a part of your faces and your hands with it. Allah does not desire to put you to hardship, but He desires to purify you, and to complete His blessing upon you so that you may give thanks."

PROPHET'S TAFSIR OF THE AYAH
Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan, vol. 2, p. 358, # 858:

حدثنا الحسن بن علي حدثنا هشام بن عبد الملك والحجاج بن منهال قالا حدثنا همام حدثنا إسحق بن عبد الله ابن أبي طلحة عن علي بن يحيى بن خلاد عن أبيه عن عمه رفاعة بن رافع بمعناه قال فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إنها لا تتم صلاة أحدكم حتى يسبغ الوضوء كما أمره الله عز وجل فيغسل وجهه ويديه إلى المرفقين ويمسح برأسه ورجليه إلى الكعبين

Al-Hasan b. 'Ali - Hisham b. 'Abd al-Malik and al-Hajjaj b. Minhal - Hammam - Ishaq b. 'Abd Allah b. Abi Talhah - 'Ali b. Yahya b. Khallad - his father - his uncle, Rifa'ah b. Rafi, with similar meaning (as the previous hadith):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: "The salat of one of you is not complete until he perfects the wudu as Allah the Most High has ordered him: he washes his face and his hands until the elbows, and he wipes his head and his feet until the ankles."

Shaykh al-Albani grades it "sahih."

http://islamport.com/d/1/alb/1/54/494.html

Following

SubhanaLLaah, this verse is very explicit in the obligation of washing the feet.
It's just that the one who has no basis in Arabic language might find it difficult to understand, however I will try to explain, may Allah make it easy for us all to understand, and may He soften our hearts to follow and be steadfast on the Sunnah.

let's break down the content in the needed portion of the verse

faGhusiluu (a command verb meaning wash); this is a transitive verb, it's object will end with fathah (فتحة) as we all -should- know from elementary Arabic. e.g ighsilu thiyaaba-kum (wash your clothes) note fatha on the word thiyaab (clothes)
If you look at the verse well, you will see that the words faces (wujooh) and hands(aydiya) all end with fathah.

so it says; wujooha (note the fathah فتحة on the ha ه)

kum (a pronoun for second person plural),
wa (and)

aydiya (note the fathah on the ya ي too )

kum (a pronoun for second person plural also).

Then the word faMsahuu ( a command verb meaning to wipe); an intransitive verb that can't take object except with an intermediary called huruf jarr, the implication of this huruf jarr is that the object of the verb will not end with fathah again rather it will end with kasra e.g imsahuu bil mimsahati (wipe with the duster) note the kasra at the end of mimsahati.

One of the huruufu jarr is ba as we have in the verse we are talking about and the verse BismiLLaahir Rahmaani Raheemi. note the kasra at the end of ismi, due to the ba at the beginning.

Another example, audhu biLLahi, note the kasra at the end of Allah also due to the ba preceeding it.

So now you understand why in the verse heads (ru'oosi) ends with kasra i.e because of the ba before it.therefore the verb acting on it is the intransitive verb with the assistance of ba (one of the huroof jarr).

Then kum; a pronoun as explained earlier

Now look at the word arjula (legs), and note how it ends with fathah like the first two words wujooha-kum (faces) and aydiya-kum (hands), this means the word acting on it is the transitive verb ighsiluu(wash) not the intransitive verb imsahuu(wipe).

Now this variation in the ending of words is not a coincidence at all rather it is something known to even the basic students of Arabiyyah like me. It is a result of the position of the word in the sentence and the meaning intended by the speaker.

let me give us some examples;

first
Allah says; wa kallama Allahu musa takleema

Allah spoke to Musa.

note the word Allah ends with dhammah and this means the one who did the speaking is Allah.
some misguided sects said Allah doesn't speak, this verse is a clear cut retort to their innovation.

Another example

إنما يخشى الله من عباده العلماء

The only ones who have khashyah (a type of fear) for Allah amongst His slaves are the ulama (scholars).

You see the word Allah is the object of the sentence and the word ulama is the object.
Normally in an Arabic sentence, the subject comes before object. But the arrangement of the sentence can be distorted - or better put rearranged - for meanings intended by the speaker, as it is in the verse.

Your ability to comprehend the implications of these rearrangements is dependent on your skill in the language.

I hope what I have stated above is sufficient for the one who seeks the truth.
So perform your ablution -O Muslim- as your Lord has commanded you!
I only explained the distorted verse, there are so many hadiths on the commandment and obligation of washing the feet, I pray Allah gives me time to type and upload some of them.

AlhamduliLlah who has made this explanation successful, I pray that He makes it more understood than stated, and that He forgives any errors therein. Aameen.

This issue reminds me of a statement you posted and attributed -without reference- to Imam Ali;

EYESIGHT IS USELESS IF THE INSIGHT IS BLIND" ~Imam Ali (alayhi Salam).

Jazakumullah yah sheikh

Newnas:
SubhanaLLaah, this verse is very explicit in the obligation of washing the feet.
It's just that the one who has no basis in Arabic language might find it difficult to understand, however I will try to explain, may Allah make it easy for us all to understand, and may He soften our hearts to follow and be steadfast on the Sunnah.

let's break down the content in the needed portion of the verse

faGhusiluu (a command verb meaning wash); this is a transitive verb, it's object will end with fathah (فتحة) as we all -should- know from elementary Arabic. e.g ighsilu thiyaaba-kum (wash your clothes) note fatha on the word thiyaab (clothes)
If you look at the verse well, you will see that the words faces (wujooh) and hands(aydiya) all end with fathah.

so it says; wujooha (note the fathah فتحة on the ha ه)

kum (a pronoun for second person plural),
wa (and)

aydiya (note the fathah on the ya ي too )

kum (a pronoun for second person plural also).

Then the word faMsahuu ( a command verb meaning to wipe); an intransitive verb that can't take object except with an intermediary called huruf jarr, the implication of this huruf jarr is that the object of the verb will not end with fathah again rather it will end with kasra e.g imsahuu bil mimsahati (wipe with the duster) note the kasra at the end of mimsahati.

One of the huruufu jarr is ba as we have in the verse we are talking about and the verse BismiLLaahir Rahmaani Raheemi. note the kasra at the end of ismi, due to the ba at the beginning.

Another example, audhu biLLahi, note the kasra at the end of Allah also due to the ba preceeding it.

So now you understand why in the verse heads (ru'oosi) ends with kasra i.e because of the ba before it.therefore the verb acting on it is the intransitive verb with the assistance of ba (one of the huroof jarr).

Then kum; a pronoun as explained earlier

Now look at the word arjula (legs), and note how it ends with fathah like the first two words wujooha-kum (faces) and aydiya-kum (hands), this means the word acting on it is the transitive verb ighsiluu(wash) not the intransitive verb imsahuu(wipe).

Now this variation in the ending of words is not a coincidence at all rather it is something known to even the basic students of Arabiyyah like me. It is a result of the position of the word in the sentence and the meaning intended by the speaker.

let me give us some examples;

first
Allah says; wa kallama Allahu musa takleema

Allah spoke to Musa.

note the word Allah ends with dhammah and this means the one who did the speaking is Allah.
some misguided sects said Allah doesn't speak, this verse is a clear cut retort to their innovation.

Another example

إنما يخشى الله من عباده العلماء

The only ones who have khashyah (a type of fear) for Allah amongst His slaves are the ulama (scholars).

You see the word Allah is the object of the sentence and the word ulama is the object.
Normally in an Arabic sentence, the subject comes before object. But the arrangement of the sentence can be distorted - or better put rearranged - for meanings intended by the speaker, as it is in the verse.

Your ability to comprehend the implications of these rearrangements is dependent on your skill in the language.

I hope what I have stated above is sufficient for the one who seeks the truth.
So perform your ablution -O Muslim- as your Lord has commanded you!
I only explained the distorted verse, there are so many hadiths on the commandment and obligation of washing the feet, I pray Allah gives me time to type and upload some of them.

AlhamduliLlah who has made this explanation successful, I pray that He makes it more understood than stated, and that He forgives any errors therein. Aameen.

What a grammatical gymnasium!

# First, Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir under the Verse of Wudu:

وقال ابن جرير : حدثنا علي بن سهل ، حدثنا مؤمل حدثنا حماد حدثنا عاصم الأحول ، عن أنس قال : نزل القرآن بالمسح ، والسنة الغسل . وهذا أيضا إسناد صحيح .

Ibn Jarir - 'Ali b. Sahl - Muammal - Hammad - 'Asim al-Ahwal - Anas:

The Qur'an was revealed with wiping, and the Sunnah is to wash."

And this chain is also sahih.

Anas here expresses the root of this great Sunni confusion.

# Second, another early Sunni giant Imam, Ibn Hazm also writes:

"Our opinion concerning the two feet is that Quran verily descended with (the order of) wiping. Allah the most High says 'And wipe your heads and your feets'. Whether it is read Arjulakum or Arjulikum, it is in ALL circumstances conjoined with the heads whether in terms of wording or place. It is not permissible to separate a noun and another conjoined to it (with "and" by a new intermediate ruling."

Ref: al-Muhalla, vol. 3, page #120


# Third, Imam Ibn Arabi also add:

"The fact that it is read Arjulakum does not cancel its obligation to WIPE. This is because this "WA (AND)" is of the meaning of "WITH" gives Fathiha (like Arjulakum). You say, 'I passed by Zayd (Zaydi) and (WA) Amr (Amra)" intending to say "With Amr". This is exactly the case with "And WIPE your heads (Ruhusikum) and your feet (Arjulakum)".

Ref: Al-Futuhaat al-Makiyya, vol.1, p. #518.


The conjunction in Arabic may conjoin the two conjuncts in both their hukm (ruling) and their grammar, or may conjoin them in their hukm (ruling) only without the grammar. Both functions of the coordinating conjunction "wa" are in the Qur'an. For instance, this verse contains the same grammatical format as that of the Verse of Wudu:

أَنَّ اللَّهَ بَرِيءٌ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ وَرَسُولُهُ فَإِن تُبْتُمْ فَهُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ وَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّكُمْ غَيْرُ مُعْجِزِي اللَّهِ وَبَشِّرِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ

^"....Ann'Allah bariy'hu minal mushrikina WA Rasuluhu..."

The conjunction "WA" has conjoined them in hukm only, and not in grammar. This is exactly what we have in the Verse of Wudu also.
Basically, the Ahl al-Sunnah have no argument, with regards to the Verse of Wudu - neither textual nor grammatical.


# Newnas grammatical gymnastics is that because there's "Fathiah" in "ArjuLAkum", it must go back jumping its own verb (mas'h - wipe) and conjoined itself to "Fagsiluh (wash)". Really this is laughable . What kind of gymnasium is that?

# Why "fathiha" on "ArjuLAkum"? The ayah reads, "...wa 'msahu BI ruhusikum WA arjulakum..." [and WIPE your heads and your feet...]. Here, "mas'h (WIPE)" comes with 'Fathiah' and this affect its two objects (heads and feet). However, there is a preposition "BI" with "kesro" at the beginning of "ruhusikum (heads)". It is this "Bi" with kesro that give "ruhuSIkum" the "kesro" for smooth pronunciation while the original "Fathiha" on it is hidden. This "Fathiha" then showed in the second object (feet) "ArjuLAkum".

TWO RECITATION OF THE VERSE
There are two mutawatir recitations of that word in the verse: arjuLAkum and arjuLIkum. Both of them are mutawatir, and both of them are correct. The term arjuLIkum leaves absolutely no room for manipulation: it means WIPING, and there is absolutely no way to play games with it. So, Sunnis are confused. Does the same verse contradict itself through its dual recitations? Instead of agreeing with the obvious - that both terms have the same meaning - Sunnis try to play games with the meaning of "wipe."

^In Sunni documentations, there are mutawatir ahadith on "WIPING OF FEET" (one of which is posted at the OP). These mutawatir ahadith on "wiping of feet" are in perfect harmony with the Quran.

# On the other hand, there is also mutawatir ahadith on "Washing of feet". This is absolutely against the order of the Quran. Some Sunni ulama however try to play games with Quran, bending it to agree with ahadith on washing of feet.

* What happens to mutawatir ahadith on "Wiping of feet"? Why hiding it as if they never existed?

Sarcasm01:
Jazakumullah yah sheikh

In fact, your Sheik should be careful trying to twist a clear verse of the Quran, and a clear Tafsir of the ayah by the Prophet.

# Imam Abu Dawud documents:

Al-Hasan b. 'Ali - Hisham b. 'Abd al-Malik and al-Hajjaj b. Minhal - Hammam - Ishaq b. 'Abd Allah b. Abi Talhah - 'Ali b. Yahya b. Khallad - his father - his uncle, Rifa'ah b. Rafi, with similar meaning (as the previous hadith):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: "The salat of one of you is not complete until he perfects the wudu as Allah the Most High has ordered him: he washes his face and his hands until the elbows, and he wipes his head and his feet until the ankles."

Shaykh al-Albani grades it "sahih."

http://islamport.com/d/1/alb/1/54/494.html

# The Arabic text of this hadith is at the OP or see the link.

The one who seeks truth, a single proof would suffice him, but the one who follows his desire will not benefit from a thousand proofs!

Like I said, I hope what I've explained is sufficient for the one who seeks the truth.

بسم الله و الحمد لله و الصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

A grammatical gymnasium?
If that's too complex for you to comprehend then I ask Allah to help you!

The explanation I gave has been reported from Ibn Abbass, AbduLLah bn Mas'od, Urwah, Ataa, Ikrimah, Hasan alBalsree and many others among the salaf (you should have found that in Ibn Katheer during your research. Sorry, you don't have books, you only Google Search!) except that I broke the explanation -by Allah's permit- to very basic level for everyone to understand!


Like Sheikh Mashoor Hasan al-Salman explained that; when two texts (of Quran and sunnah) seemingly contradict one another then the problem is with the reader because he is not applying each text in its right place, time or condition!

The same thing applies to you here; the recitation of fathah (where the leg follows the verb of washing i.e ghusl) is talking about washing the feet, the recitation of kasra is talking about wiping when you are wearing socks or (khuff) leather boots.

As for the hadith you quoted from Abu Dawud then it doesn't support your claim, if you opened your mind wider than your eyes you would have seen that the explanation is similar to the verse you quoted.

If you shia had left the sunnah to explain the Quran you wouldn't have run into this mess you found yourselves in. So, the sunnah explained the matter and gave each recitation it's proper condition of applications. AlhamduliLlah who has made this religion clear and simple.

O you who believe obey Allah and obey The messenger (alyhissolaat wassalaam)

AbduLLah bn Amr (Allah be pleased with him) narrated; Once the Prophet (alyhissolaat wassalaam) remained behind us in a journey. He joined us while we were performing ablution for Solah, which was over-due. We were just passing wet hands over our feet (and not washing them properly) so the Prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam addressed us in a loud voice and said twice or thrice; "save your heels from the fire". (Soheeh bukharee: 60)

The companion who narrated -and definitely witnessed in fact was a part of - the story mentioned the reason why the messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam shouted on them and that is because they were wiping their feet. So, no one should come after several centuries and start claiming to understand the occurrence that the witness.

The reason why they were wiping is also obvious from the hadith; (WHILE WE WERE MAKING ABLUTION FOR SOLAH WHICH WAS OVER DUE) so, they were rushing for the Solah because the time was almost elapsing. So they knew that they should wash the feet but were careless because they were rushing to meet the time of Solah.

Lastly;
When next you want to quote any reference, don't quote the Quran, rather quote your books that your Sheikhs fabricated.

You shia don't believe in the Quran neither do you follow the sunnah. rather you only follow the fabrications of your Sheikhs and use taqiyyah to cover up and distort the religion of Allah's servants. Only Allah can recompense you for your evils.

I pray that Allah rectifies you and guides you out of the evil path you are. I also pray that Allah grants me steadfastness upon the sunnah and understanding of the salaf i.e pious predecessors.

I will soon create a thread, discussing therein your misguided and deviant creeds regarding the Quran and how you raised Ali in status above the last Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam .

I pray to Allah to make it easy for me to accomplish the task and purify my intention.

Then I invited you to a thread I created but you have been hiding from it

https://www.nairaland.com/3015474/nail-shia-coffin-must-read

Newnas:


A grammatical gymnasium?
If that's too complex for you to comprehend then I ask Allah to help you!

The explanation I gave has been reported from Ibn Abbass, AbduLLah bn Mas'od, Urwah, Ataa, Ikrimah, Hasan alBalsree and many others among the salaf (you should have found that in Ibn Katheer during your research. [s]Sorry, you don't have books, you only Google Search!) except that I broke the explanation -by Allah's permit- to very basic level for everyone to understand[/s]

You mean that Grammatical Acrobatics of yours was explained by Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Ikrimah et al? Say: Produce your evidence if you are truthful {Quran}.

# Ibn Kathir you quoted even agreed "[Wiping is what was revealed in the Quran]". Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir under the ayah of Wudu [Q.5:6], Sheik Ibn Taymiyyah in his Minhaj Sunnah, Imam Ibn Hazm, Imam Ibn Arabi and many others further revealed that there are two Mutawattir recitation for the ayah: ArjuLAkum and ArjuLIkum. Arjulakum can never meant "washing" while Arjulikum meant "wiping". That will be huge contradiction. Therefore as posted earlier, Ahlu sunnah Ulama argued that whether one recites it with "LA" or "LI", the command is still the same "to Wipe". And besides, this is obvious for The conjunction in Arabic may conjoin the two conjuncts in both their hukm (ruling) and their grammar, or may conjoin them in their hukm (ruling) only without the grammar. In the case of Wudu, the new hukm (ruling) after "faghsilu (wash) is "mas'h (wipe)" which conjunct both heads and feet with "wa (and)".

# Why does "ruusikum (your heads)" got Nasb (kesro, under stressor) while "Arjulakum" got fathiha (upper stressor) while both should follow their fil (verb, I.e WIPE) with fathiha? Both the heads and feet have their upper stressor (fathiha) but that of head is hidden because of "BI" with under stressor (nasb) hence, "your heads (ruuSIkum)" take nasb of its preposition (BI) for smooth pronunciation. This is what make mutawatir recitation of arjuLIkum (also with nasb) correct. "BI" is a preposition which denote the extent of wiping of head.

Newnas:


The same thing applies to you here; the recitation of fathah (where the leg follows the verb of washing i.e ghusl) is talking about washing the feet, the recitation of kasra is talking about wiping when you are wearing socks or (khuff) leather boots.

Provide evidence, a Sahih hadith from the lip of the Prophet. Allah never mentions khuff. Feet is what is mentioned in the glorious book. All those reciters who recite and those who reported and those who documented ArjuLIkum Never applied it to Khuff (socks). Perhaps that was the twisted conclusion of your wahabist Aimma. And I can only ask for the clear evidence from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) that reciting the ayah with nasb meant "wipe socks". Really your case is laughable because you are a pure amateur.

Newnas:


As for the hadith you quoted from Abu Dawud then it doesn't support your claim, if you opened your mind wider than your eyes you would have seen that the explanation is similar to the verse you quoted.

You mean with your Grammatical Acrobatic gymnasium?! Sorry is your case. Soon I will in sha Allah post about 12 ahadith that affirm "wiping of feet". I hope we shall see more acrobatics of Arabic grammar

Newnas:


If you shia had left the sunnah to explain the Quran you wouldn't have run into this mess you found yourselves in. So, the sunnah explained the matter and gave each recitation it's proper condition of applications. AlhamduliLlah who has made this religion clear and simple.

O you who believe obey Allah and obey The messenger (alyhissolaat wassalaam)

Unfortunately for you and your cohorts, you have deviated completely from the legacy of the Prophet all in the name of following "Sunnah" and "Tafsir of the Quran" as explained by every tom, dick and harry.

Imam al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H) in his Tafsir writes:

"In the Sahih report, it is recorded that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said in his sermon at Ghadir Khumm: 'I am leaving behind over you the Two Weighty Things (al-Thaqalain): The book of Allah and my offspring (Kitab Allah wa itratih); Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-fount."

Ref: Tafsir al-Quran al-'Azim (Dar al-Taybah Li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi; 2nd edition, 1420 H)[annotator: Sami b. Muhammad Salamah], vol. 7, p. 201.

The hadith Thaqalain is Mutawattir. If you take your Tafsir of the Quran or Sunnah of the Prophet from other than the itrah (Prophet's offspring), possibility of deviation from the truth is VERY HIGH. Only his itrah can never deviate from the Quran.

Newnas:


AbduLLah bn Amr (Allah be pleased with him) narrated; Once the Prophet (alyhissolaat wassalaam) remained behind us in a journey. He joined us while we were performing ablution for Solah, which was over-due. We were just passing wet hands over our feet (and not washing them properly) so the Prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam addressed us in a loud voice and said twice or thrice; "save your heels from the fire". (Soheeh bukharee: 60)

# The cancelled part is interpolation. It never occur in the Arabic text. That's how you guys manipulate texts to suit your agenda.

# It is obvious the Sahabah were WIPING their feet. Was that their first time of performing Wudu? Obviously not. So how come they were wiping? It is obvious that was their usual practice.

# Prophet never ask "why are you wiping instead of washing"? He simply say, "protect your heel from the fire"! Here, there's high probability that there feet is dirty or even stained with impurities like urine.

# The explanations of the itrah of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is if one's leg is dirty, you first wash the dirtiness thoroughly and dry. Then, you can perform Wudu (with the order of wiping of feet).

Newnas:


Lastly;
When next you want to quote any reference, don't quote the Quran, rather quote your books that your Sheikhs fabricated.

You shia don't believe in the Quran neither do you follow the sunnah. rather you only follow the fabrications of your Sheikhs and use taqiyyah to cover up and distort the religion of Allah's servants. Only Allah can recompense you for your evils.

I pray that Allah rectifies you and guides you out of the evil path you are. I also pray that Allah grants me steadfastness upon the sunnah and understanding of the salaf i.e pious predecessors.

I will soon create a thread, discussing therein your misguided and deviant creeds regarding the Quran and how you raised Ali in status above the last Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam .

I pray to Allah to make it easy for me to accomplish the task and purify my intention.

Then I invited you to a thread I created but you have been hiding from it

https://www.nairaland.com/3015474/nail-shia-coffin-must-read

Sorry I can feel your frustrations. It is obvious.

Sarcasm01:
Jazakumullah yah sheikh

Aameen wa iyyaak

I'm not close to being a Sheikh, my brother, and Allah bears witness to that.
I'm only striving, the path to knowledge is strenuous and long, no one achieves success in it except by Allah's Taofeeq.

However, I pray and hope that Allah makes me and my generations to come scholars and callers of the path of Allah and His messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam according to the understanding of the salaf i.e pious predecessors.

FOLLOWING ARE SUNNI AHADITH ON "WIPING OF FEET" IN WUDU

This is the report of Imam 'Ali (1) from Musnad al-Humaydi:

حدثنا الحميدى حدثنا سفيان حدثنى أبو السوداء : عمرو النهدى عن ابن عبد خير عن أبيه قال : رأيت على بن أبى طالب يمسح ظهور قدميه ويقول : لولا أنى رأيت رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- مسح على ظهورهما لظننت أن بطونهما أحق.

This is the report of 'Uthman b. 'Affan (2) from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:

حدثنا محمد بن بشر قال حدثنا سعيد بن أبي عروبة عن قتادة عن مسلم بن يسار عن حمران قال دعا عثمان بماء فتوضأ ثم ضحك فقال ألا تسألوني مما أضحك قالوا يا أمير المؤمنين ما اضحكك قال رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم توضأ كما توضأت فمضمض واستنشق وغسل وجهه ثلاثا ويديه ثلاثا ومسح برأسه وظهر قدميه

This is the report of Ibn 'Umar (3) from Sharh Ma'ani al-Athar of Imam al-Tahawi:

حدثنا ابن أبي داود قال: ثنا أحمد بن الحسين اللهبي قال : ثنا ابن أبي فديك ، عن ابن أبي ذئب ، عن نافع عن ابن عمر، أنه كان إذا توضأ ونعلاه في قدميه، مسح ظهور قدميه بيديه ، ويقول : كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يصنع هكذا

This is the report of Ibn 'Abbas (4) from Musannaf 'Abd al-Razzaq:

عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن قتادة عن جابر بن يزيد أو عكرمة عن بن عباس قال افترض الله غسلتين ومسحتين ألا ترى أنه ذكر التيمم فجعل مكان الغسلتين مسحتين وترك المسحتين وقال رجل لمطر الوراق من كان يقول المسح على الرجلين فقال فقهاء كثير

This is the report of Anas b. Malik (5) from Tafsir al-Tabari:

حدثنا ابن بشار قال حدثنا ابن أبي عدي عن حميد عن موسى بن أنس قال : خطب الحجاج فقال : اغسلوا وجوهكم وأيديكم وأرجلكم ظهورهما وبطونهما وعراقيبهما فإن ذلك أدنى إلى أخبثيكم قال أنس : صدق الله وكذب الحجاج قال الله : { وامسحوا برؤوسكم وأرجلكم إلى الكعبين }

This is the report of Abu Malik al-Ash'ari (6) from Musnad Ahmad:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا محمد بن جعفر ثنا سعيد عن قتادة عن شهر بن حوشب عن عبد الرحمن بن غنم عن أبي مالك الأشعري انه قال لقومه : اجتمعوا أصلي بكم صلاة رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فلما اجتمعوا قال هل فيكم أحد من غيركم قالوا لا الا بن أخت لنا قال بن أخت القوم منهم فدعا بجفنة فيها ماء فتوضأ ومضمض واستنشق وغسل وجهه ثلاثا وذراعيه ثلاثا ثلاثا ومسح برأسه وظهر قدميه ثم صلى بهم فكبر بهم ثنتين وعشرين تكبيرة يكبر إذا سجد وإذا رفع رأسه من السجود وقرأ في الركعتين بفاتحة الكتاب واسمع من يليه

This is the report of Rifa'ah b. Rafi' (7) from Sunan Ibn Majah:

حدثنا محمد بن يحيى . حدثنا حجاج . حدثنا همام . حدثنا إسحاق بن عبد الله بن أبي طلحة . حدثني علي بن يحيى بن خلاد عن أبيه عن عمه رفاعة بن رافع : - أنه كان جالسا عند النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فقال أنها لا تتم صلاة لأحد حتى يسبغ الوضوء كما أمره الله تعالى . يغسل وجهه ويديه إلى المرفقين ويمسح برأسه ورجليه إلى الكعبين

This is the report of Tamim b. Zayd al-Ansari ( from Sharh Ma'ani al-Athar of Imam al-Tahawi:

حدثنا روح بن الفرج قال ثنا عمرو بن خالد قال ثنا بن لهيعة عن أبي الأسود عن عباد بن تميم عن عمه : أن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم توضأ ومسح على القدمين

This is the report of 'Abd Allah b. Zayd al-Ansari (9) from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:

حدثنا ابن عيية عن عمرو بن يحيى عن أبيه عن عبد الله بن زيد أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم توضأ فغسل وجهه ثلاثا ويديه مرتين ومسح برأسه ورجليه مرتين.

This is the report of Aws b. Abi Aws (10) from Tafsir al-Tabari:

الحارث قال، حدثنا القاسم بن سلام قال، حدثنا هشيم قال، حدثنا يعلى بن عطاء، عن أبيه، عن أوس بن أبي أوس قال :رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أتى سُبَاطة قوم، فتوضأ ومسح على قدميه

These are TEN Sahabah. There are others too. But, these are sufficient for tawattur. All of them are about wiping the feet. Sunnis ignore them and pick the other ones about washing. On what basis have they done that? They cherry-pick their own ahadith, and pretend as though reports in favour of wiping do not exist, or do not have authenticity or tawattur too.

And you said "heated debate"!

The scholars don't even give any importance to these weak and baseless opinions. It's you and your taqiyyah (lie) and mut'ah(prostitution) loving cohorts that are always seeking -cheap-popularity.

Ten narrations are sufficient for tawaatur?! another reckless usage of terms.

Maybe you think you are talking to kindergarten kids. trading words with deviants like you is a real waste of effort.

Your desperation to spread your misguidance is very obvious from the way you argue!

If only you would repent! If only you would repent!! If only you would repent!!

Come and post another crap since you like to talk last, it gives you that boost needed by your ego. A typical characteristic of deviants

Newnas:
Ten narrations are sufficient for tawaatur?! another reckless usage of terms.

Maybe you think you are talking to kindergarten kids. trading words with deviants like you is a real waste of effort.

Your desperation to spread your misguidance is very obvious from the way you argue!

If only you would repent! If only you would repent!! If only you would repent!!

Come and post another crap since you like to talk last, it gives you that boost needed by your ego. A typical characteristic of deviants

In Sunni ḥadīth sciences, Dr. Suhaib Ḥasan tells us what a mutawātir ḥadīth is:

"A mutawatir hadith is one which is reported by such a large number of people that they cannot be expected to agree upon a lie, all of them together.... There is no precise definition for “a large number of reporters”; although the numbers four, five, seven, ten, twelve, forty and seventy, among others, have all been variously suggested as a minimum, the exact number is irrelevant (some reporters, e.g. Imams of Hadith, carry more weight anyway than others who are their contemporaries): the important condition is that the possibility of coincidence or “organised falsehood” be obviously negligible.

Source: Dr. Suhaib Hasan, An Introduction to the Science of Hadith (Riyadh: Darussalam), p. 30

The narrations are still far from tawaatur based on your definition because;

Sa'eed bn Abu Urubah in the chain of the second report you mentioned is a mudallis as Imam Ibn Hajar stated in his taqreeb, and you can see that the hadith is mu'anmu'an. in fact he had memory loss during the last part of his life (ikhtalata).

And one of the conditions of tawaatur is that the reports should be authentically reported in each generation.

Then the fourth and fifth reports even take them farther away from tawaatur. because they are mawqoof (actions of a companion) not marfoo' (action of the prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam).

# Companions could make errors, they are not infallible, however that doesn't in any way affect their virtues.

#One of the conditions of tawaatur has been compromised here, tawaatur reports should not be based on ijtihaad.

See fannul usuul by imam tibreeziyy, nuzhah by Ibn Hajar, uloomul Hadith by Ibn Solah and min atyabi minah by Sheikh al-Abbaad etc for better explanation on the conditions of tawaatur.

Newnas:
The narrations are still far from tawaatur based on your definition because; Sa'eed bn Abu Urubah in the chain of the second report you mentioned is a mudallis as Imam Ibn Hajar stated in his taqreeb, and you can see that the hadith is mu'anmu'an. in fact he had memory loss during the last part of his life (ikhtalata).

You do not consider all that in Mutawattir ahadith.

# al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al‘Asqalānī (d. 856 H) emphasizes:

"No investigation is made concerning the narrators of the mutawātir report. Rather, it is obligatory to follow it without doing any investigation."

Ref: Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Sharḥ Nuzhat al-Naẓar fī Tawdīḥ Nukhbat al-Fikar fī Muṣṭaliḥ Ahl al-Athar (Riyadh: Dār al-Mathūr li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 1st edition, 1432 H) [annotator: Abū Mu’ādh Ṭāriq b. ‘Awaḍ Allāh b. Muḥammad], p. 47


# Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah also mentions this, in another manner:

"When the chains are many, they support one another, such that certainty may be achieved through them, even if the narrators are immoral people and fussāq"

Ref: Abū al-‘Abbās Aḥmad b. ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm b. Taymiyyah al-Ḥarrānī, Majmū’ al-Fatāwā, vol. 18, p. 26.

# Shaykh al-Albānī also states:

"It is not a condition of the mutawātir ḥadīth that its chains must be free from weakness, because its confirmation is only through their combined strength, not through the individual chains."

Ref: Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, Irwā al-Ghalīl fī Takhrīj Aḥādīth Manār al-Sabīl (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islāmī; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 6, p. 95


* Another crucial point concerning the mutawātir riwāyah is that its narrators may not even be Muslims. Ibn Taymiyyah continues:

"The correct opinion that is followed by the majority is that there is no specific number for tawāttur, and that certainty … which is achieved after the report sometimes occurs due to the large number of the narrators – when they are several, their report establishes certainty, even if they are infidels – and sometimes it is due to their religion and truthfulness"

Ref: Abū al-‘Abbās Aḥmad b. ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm b. Taymiyyah al-Ḥarrānī, Majmū’ al-Fatāwā, vol. 18

^And like I said after posting the 10 reports, there are LOTS of other reports on wiping of feet. Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah alone recorded 8 different narrations which is different from the previous 10, and in itself enough to prove the hadith tawattur.

AlBaqir:
^And like I said after posting the 10 reports, there are LOTS of other reports on wiping of feet. Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah alone recorded 8 different narrations which is different from the previous 10, and in itself enough to prove the hadith tawattur.

So mutawaatir narration are those that are reported by very many people and that's all?

The way you flaunt your ignorance is very frustrating and interesting!

You just use terms recklessly, even scholars who spent their whole life researching about hadith don't audaciously declare narrations to be mutawaatir.

You on an internet forum where most of the members don't know the definition of tawaatur, that's why you are free to talk recklessly and un wisely.

You mix, maqoof, Munqati and mudallas narrations and call them mutawaatir! So ugly!

Then even those that are free of defect are talking about wiping the socks not feet. why do you interpolate texts and their meanings?!

It's high time you repented!!

Bnladan:
I'm sure u will agree with me dat Shi'as dnt even perform ablution d way d prophet SAW described, talk less of d way dey pray.

You want to explain to us how Shia are wrong in the way they perform their ablutions different to that of Nabi salallahu alayhi wa ahli?! Let me help out:

# Shi'a Ablutions

* Hands are washed two times

* Mouth is washed two times

* Water is sniffed through the nose in and out two times

* Face is washed two times (with thumb and middle fingers determining the length side-wise) up - down.

* Arms are washed twice each usually from elbows to tips of the fingers

* Frontal part of the head is wipe once

* And feet are wipe from tip of the toes to the "ankle" that joined the feet and the leg, once.

Sunni Ablutions

* Hands are washed one or two or three times

* Mouth are rinsed one or two or three times

* Water is sniffed through the nose one or two or three times

* Face is washed anyhow one or two or three times

* Arms are washed from tip of the fingers till elbows one or two or three times

* Whole head is wiped from front to back, and returned from back to front. Some Sunni only wipe front to back.

* Ear is "rinsed" once

* Feet are washed with enough water to desirability from ankle downward or anyhow (but ankle is limitation).

AlBaqir:


You want to explain to us how Shia are wrong in the way they perform their ablutions different to that of Nabi salallahu alayhi wa ahli?! Let me help out:

# Shi'a Ablutions

* Hands are washed two times

* Mouth is washed two times

* Water is sniffed through the nose in and out two times

* Face is washed two times (with thumb and middle fingers determining the length side-wise) up - down.

* Arms are washed twice each usually from elbows to tips of the fingers

* Frontal part of the head is wipe once

* And feet are wipe from tip of the toes to the "ankle" that joined the feet and the leg, once.

Sunni Ablutions

* Hands are washed one or two or three times

* Mouth are rinsed one or two or three times

* Water is sniffed through the nose one or two or three times

* Face is washed anyhow one or two or three times

* Arms are washed from tip of the fingers till elbows one or two or three times

* Whole head is wiped from front to back, and returned from back to front. Some Sunni only wipe front to back.

* Ear is "rinsed" once

* Feet are washed with enough water to desirability from ankle downward or anyhow (but ankle is limitation).

Laisa ladayya ma aquuluhu lak. Ana ukhaadibul muslimeena faqad. Wa bas.

AlBaqir:


You want to explain to us how Shia are wrong in the way they perform their ablutions different to that of Nabi salallahu alayhi wa ahli?! Let me help out:

# Shi'a Ablutions

* Hands are washed two times

* Mouth is washed two times

* Water is sniffed through the nose in and out two times

* Face is washed two times (with thumb and middle fingers determining the length side-wise) up - down.

* Arms are washed twice each usually from elbows to tips of the fingers

* Frontal part of the head is wipe once

* And feet are wipe from tip of the toes to the "ankle" that joined the feet and the leg, once.

Sunni Ablutions

* Hands are washed one or two or three times

* Mouth are rinsed one or two or three times

* Water is sniffed through the nose one or two or three times

* Face is washed anyhow one or two or three times

* Arms are washed from tip of the fingers till elbows one or two or three times

* Whole head is wiped from front to back, and returned from back to front. Some Sunni only wipe front to back.

* Ear is "rinsed" once

* Feet are washed with enough water to desirability from ankle downward or anyhow (but ankle is limitation).

Salamu alaikum Albaqr, I do not really like secterianism at all but I must say that I am more inclined to sunni if I am to be classified, however I am one of your followers who do follow some of your discussions here silently as I termed them interesting in most cases. But in this, I must say that I am really dissappointed(not that it should matter to you anyway) in how you claimed ignorance on sunni's ablution, in case you truely do not know, then washing is done 3 times and 2 times minimum, not 1 or 2 or 3 as you said here. This is just too simple for you not to know hence my irk that you intentional wrote those 1 or 2 or 3 up there!

Oklander:


Salamu alaikum Albaqr, I do not really like secterianism at all but I must say that I am more inclined to sunni if I am to be classified, however I am one of your followers who do follow some of your discussions here silently as I termed them interesting in most cases. But in this, I must say that I am really dissappointed(not that it should matter to you anyway) in how you claimed ignorance on sunni's ablution, in case you truely do not know, then washing is done 3 times and 2 times minimum, not 1 or 2 or 3 as you said here. This is just too simple for you not to know hence my irk that you intentional wrote those 1 or 2 or 3 up there!

It is just sectarianism. Thank God you spotted that. As you can see from his analysis about WUDHU, it is similar. Sectarianism is what's clouding people's reasoning these days. The brother up there said Shi'a dont perform wudhu the way of the prophet. Shia said the same. But from the table above, you only notice choice of words WASH/WIPE. Once sectarianism is trashed, the rest is solvable. But many people dont get it. That's usually hardliners from both sides.

At least you recognise you learned things from him compared to some. By the way, i love your signature. It describes me perfectly

Oklander:


Salamu alaikum Albaqr, I do not really like secterianism at all but I must say that I am more inclined to sunni if I am to be classified, however I am one of your followers who do follow some of your discussions here silently as I termed them interesting in most cases. But in this, I must say that I am really dissappointed(not that it should matter to you anyway) in how you claimed ignorance on sunni's ablution, in case you truely do not know, then washing is done 3 times and 2 times minimum, not 1 or 2 or 3 as you said here. This is just too simple for you not to know hence my irk that you intentional wrote those 1 or 2 or 3 up there!

Wa alaykum Salam

# Thank God you did not deny the fact that you (or everyone) are more inclined to sunnism (or Shi'ism) either by thought or practice or both. This I appreciate a lot. That is sincerity.

# Dear brother, in Sunni ablutions, there is nothing like "3 times and 2 times" rather you have choice of either i.e "3 times or 2 times(if that is your intent). However, as we have ahadith that claim Nabi salallahu alayhi wa ahli washed 2 times, so there are ahadith that say 3 times (in fact, including feet which negate no quantity which many do today). And there are ahadith which clearly never mentioned how many time(s) each part of the body was washed or wiped. This is where some Sunni fuqaha (jurists) ruled that wudhu can be performed once. A clear example of this is ghusl according to Sunni fiqh. After you must have washed your private parts, you do ablutions ONCE and then bath half-way after washing the whole head. Apart from this, ahadith exist in Sunni documentations that Nabi performed ablutions ONCE.

# Please if you have your fiqh sunnah, you can read all Sunni variations and different of opinions on wudhu. For sure no Sunni fuqaha (I don't know the Salafis) kicked against ablutions "once".

# For the record, I was born a Sunni, studied a Sunni, grew in religion a Sunni, preached a Sunni. So, I know the house well and if I don't know, I do my home work thoroughly.

May Allah forgive my mistakes.

^^ Just as a follow up, here is one of many Sunni ahadith that specify ONCE.

Imam Bukhari documents:

Book: Book of wudhu

Chapter: The washing of the body parts (i.e., the parts which are washed in ablution) once only while performing ablution

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:


The prophet (s) performed ablution by washing the body parts [size=14pt]only once[/size].

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 157
In-book reference : Book 4, Hadith 23
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 1, Book 4, Hadith 159
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/4

Empiree:
It is just sectarianism. Thank God you spotted that. As you can see from his analysis about WUDHU, it is similar. Sectarianism is what's clouding people's reasoning these days. The brother up there said Shi'a dont perform wudhu the way of the prophet. Shia said the same. But from the table above, you only notice choice of words WASH/WIPE. Once sectarianism is trashed, the rest is solvable. But many people dont get it. That's usually hardliners from both sides.

At least you recognise you learned things from him compared to some. By the way, i love your signature. It describes me perfectly

# You always try to balance what is never balance and arrive at "there is no big deal".

# It is very disappointing to claim that Albaqir pointing out that Sunni's washings in wudhu is either 1 or 2 or 3 times, is sectarianism.

# Comparing the table of wudhu and concludes that "there is no big deal, its just choice of words in wash/wipe" really showed you do not care about the verse of wudhu in the glorious Quran. And obviously there is nothing like "wash and wipe" or difference between the two in your dictionary.

# Note: It is not only the feet, head is another great problem that if not properly wiped can invalidate wudhu since it is part of the wahjibat in wudhu.

I don't have problem with your choice of wudhu but telling me all is the same or that shia wudhu is wrong, hmmm...you will see my full attack.

AlBaqir:

Let's see

[size=14pt]Shi'a:[/size] Hands are washed two times


[size=14pt]Sunni:[/size] Hands are washed one or two or three times

It is believed in the Sunni text that one time is wajib. two/three times is Sunnah So no problem here.



******

[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Mouth is washed two times


[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Mouth are rinsed one or two or three times


Here again, number of times is not the problem so long as it is done at least one time. What is noticed here however is "CHOICE OF WORD". You know too well that rinse does not mean we mix listerine with water. Clearly it is choice of word.





*******
[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Water is sniffed through the nose in and out two times


[size=14pt]Sunnni[/size][/size] Water is sniffed through the nose one or two or three times

Again, to be sincere, there is still no difference. Number of times has NEVER been problem. Just that when we used to doing it 3x, it becomes custom. One time is fard and in my opinion, 2 or 3 times are for precaution purposes.




********
[size=14pt]Shi'a Face is washed two times (with thumb and middle fingers determining the length side-wise) up - down.


[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Face is washed anyhow one or two or three times

See @shia underlined, it is just precaution. I am sure there are individual Sunnis who do similar one way or the other. As for Sunni's 'anyhow', face is face. i watch my face from forehead covering entire sides of my face to shin. Hence, face is washed.




********
[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Arms are washed twice each usually from elbows to tips of the fingers


[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Arms are washed from tip of the fingers till elbows one or two or three times

Here, one notices differences where washing starts to end. Still, i see nothing wrong again. What is important is hand is washed.. The same can be said when it comes to sitting position in salat. Salafi for instance wants particular way "according to Sunnah" to them. But that wat is almost impossible for every muslim. So far, i am yet to see any difference.




*********
[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Frontal part of the head is wipe once


[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Whole head is wiped from front to back, and returned from back to front. Some Sunni only wipe front to back.

Here seems to be confusing with respect to Shi'a. I see it as lazy attempt. Why not wipe down for short?. Although there are sunnis who do the same, usually lazy ones or attempt to finish wudhu really quick.



***********

[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] And feet are wipe from tip of the toes to the "ankle" that joined the feet and the leg, once.



[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Feet are washed with enough water to desirability from ankle downward or anyhow (but ankle is limitation).

Let's say with respect to feet, Shi'a economize water. I know the importance of water in wudhu actually. Rasulullah(SAW) warned of wasting water especially in wudhu. He said minimising water in wudhu is door to "firasa" i:e spiritual insight.

My grandpa who taught me wudhu used to sing descriptions of wudhu. He would say "Ka ma se omi di e di e si o ri ke ri ke aluwala mustahab lo je (minimising water in wudhu is mustahab). See my breakdown show no BIG difference btw the two except if we want to be sectarian?. Same applies to the brother who said shia do not make wudhu the prophet way. What is the other way here other than sectarianism?.


However, i notice Shi'a skipped wiping ear. Any reason for that or you forgot to add that?

Empiree:
Let's see

[size=14pt]Shi'a:[/size] Hands are washed two times


[size=14pt]Sunni:[/size] Hands are washed one or two or three times

It is believed in the Sunni text that one time is wajib. two/three times is Sunnah So no problem here.

@underlined statement, Alhamdulillah you underlined it yourself. Do you mind showing me a sahih hadith or athar to support that?! Please save me Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, Shafii, al-Albani or whatever with no authority. As for the Salafis, there is no difference between fard and Sunnah. Both are the same.

Empiree:

[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Mouth is washed two times

[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Mouth are rinsed one or two or three times

Here again, number of times is not the problem so long as it is done at least one time. What is noticed here however is "CHOICE OF WORD". You know too well that rinse does not mean we mix listerine with water. Clearly it is choice of word.

Wallahi brother, you are the only Nairalander I fear debating with. The reason is you don't have a definite thought. Anything and everything by anyone is okay by you.

# I have posted to you once, rebuttal of sheik AbdulFattah Sarumi on Sheik Muhammad Ali Jabata. One of their "differences" is mouth washing (with fingers) or rinsing in wudhu. Sarumi believed washing of mouth with fingers negate wudhu. This is not a petty issue between both of them alone. And if you know the manhaj of Salafi very well, they are strict on doing the exact thing Nabi "did". The opposite is Bid'ah which to you "there is no big deal".

# Same apply to nose, face and arms! How exactly did Nabi washed these? Failure to do so in exact manner is Bid'ah.

Empiree:

*********
[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] Frontal part of the head is wipe once


[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Whole head is wiped from front to back, and returned from back to front. Some Sunni only wipe front to back.

Here seems to be confusing with respect to Shi'a. I see it as lazy attempt. Why not wipe down for short?. Although there are sunnis who do the same, usually lazy ones or attempt to finish wudhu really quick.

# What do you mean "Lazy attempt?"

# The Sunni known four jurists have established three or four variations as per wiping of heads.

1. Wiping just the frontal part of the head with four fingers (excluding the thumb)

2. Wiping the whole of the head using both hands (2 X 5 fingers with palms) backwards and forwards

3. Wiping same as 2 but only backwards

4. Wiping only the middle (tiny parting) of the head with the tips of both fingers (2 X 4 fingers)

# Shi'a only adopts the first of Sunni variables arguing with the verse of wudhu in the glorious Quran: "wa m'sahu BI ruhusikum...wipe A PART of your head". There are enough Shi'i ahadith to back this linguistic meaning.

Akhee, again I fear your balancing of equations.

Empiree:

[size=14pt]Shi'a[/size] And feet are wipe from tip of the toes to the "ankle" that joined the feet and the leg, once.

[size=14pt]Sunni[/size] Feet are washed with enough water to desirability from ankle downward or anyhow (but ankle is limitation).

Let's say with respect to feet, Shi'a economize water. I know the importance of water in wudhu actually. Rasulullah(SAW) warned of wasting water especially in wudhu. He said minimising water in wudhu is door to "firasa" i:e spiritual insight.

My grandpa who taught me wudhu used to sing descriptions of wudhu. He would say "Ka ma se omi di e di e si o ri ke ri ke aluwala mustahab lo je (minimising water in wudhu is mustahab). See my breakdown show no BIG difference btw the two except if we want to be sectarian?. Same applies to the brother who said shia do not make wudhu the prophet way. What is the other way here other than sectarianism?.

Am sorry this reply does not worth my comment until you resolve within yourself that "Washing is different from wiping". Notice, wiping is mentioned twice in the verse of wudhu, one for water ablutions, one for tayammum.

# Both Sunni* and Shia agreed on economizing water. That is adab of wudhu not condition for its validity. So, kindly bury it. Its of no use here.

NB: * There are ahadith that set no water limitations to washing of feet. You wash with enough water thoroughly to your desirability. So, question of economizing water does not arise at all.

Empiree:

However, i notice Shi'a skipped wiping ear. Any reason for that or you forgot to add that?

There is no skip. Shia consider wiping or rinsing of ears (inner and outer or inner alone) lobes a Bid'a that negate the sequencial order (tar'tib) of wudhu commanded in the Quran. Some Sunni try to be smart by advancing that ears is part of head that's why after wiping of the heads backwards and forwards, you wipe the ears too without taking fresh water. They however forgot to mention a single hadith where Nabi is reported to have explained that way.

For verifications, Imam Bukhari and Muslim NEVER mentioned rinsing or wiping of ears in the documentations of their narrations which describe Nabi's wudhu.

AlBaqir:



# For the record, I was born a Sunni, studied a Sunni, grew in religion a Sunni, preached a Sunni. So, I know the house well and if I don't know, I do my home work thoroughly.

was gonna ask about this long time but kept forgetting

AlBaqir:


There is no skip. Shia consider wiping or rinsing of ears (inner and outer or inner alone) lobes a Bid'a that negate the sequencial order (tar'tib) of wudhu commanded in the Quran.

How is it bid'a when there is a dalil for it in the Sunnah?. You can at least regard it as Sunnah and no obligatory sunnah bcus even in the Sunni text except Hanbali deemed it musthab.

Some Sunni try to be smart by advancing that ears is part of head that's why after wiping of the heads backwards and forwards, you wipe the ears too without taking fresh water. They however forgot to mention a single hadith where Nabi is reported to have explained that way.

For verifications, Imam Bukhari and Muslim NEVER mentioned rinsing or wiping of ears in the documentations of their narrations which describe Nabi's wudhu.

Well, it is understandable why we advance ear as part of the head base on hadith:


From 'Abdullaah ibn 'Amr - about the way of performing wudoo - he said: Then he (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) wiped his head and entered his two forefingers into his ears and wiped the backs of his ears with his thumbs. [Reported by Abu Dawood (no.135), an-Nasaa'ee (no.140), Ibn Maajah (no.422) and authenticated by Ibn Khuzairnah].

So rinsing ear is not a question of bid'a here. It is a question of whether it is fard or not. One thing for sure is the prophet(saw) did it. Dont you have this record in your text?.


Ibn Maajah narrated from ‘Abd-Allah ibn Zayd (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The ears are part of the head.”


So If the ears are part of the head, then wiping them in wudhu’ is obligatory, as is wiping the head. But the majority are of the view that wiping the ears is Sunnah and mustahabb, but is not obligatory.

It is bcus of underlined part i have to free you and admit that your wudhu as yu described is valid. So it is still in line with Sunnah. Not every prophet's action is fard. We know that.