Here is the verse of suran maidah verse 6.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلاةِ فاغْسِلُواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُواْ بِرُؤُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَينِ وَإِن كُنتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُواْ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِّنكُم مِّنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم مِّنْهُ مَا يُرِيدُ اللّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ

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

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

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

Now 2 types of shia arguments arises.

Shia says:

1st we perform massah on feet bcoz it is “arjulikum” not “arjulakum” i.e. arjulakum is wrong.

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

Now lets refute both arguments one by one.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now lets crack his arguments:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

Now lets move to extract of above arguments:

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

Here also “bi” is coming.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

& the most important thing in shia faith:

shias do not have sahih hadeeth regarding ablution, and that all the ahadeeth regarding ablution are daif (weak)

he basically spoke of masah on feet.

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

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

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

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

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


Filed under Rebuttals

29 responses to “Wudu

  1. Firoz

    As-salamalekum brother..i understand what you are trying to say here but i have one question. shia hazrat mention that it is written in sahi bukhari to wash your two boady parts and wipe two parts for wudu..i will give you refrence what they give me are as follow

    Sahi bukhari vol 1 page 957 kitab al-wudhu

    can you please explain me it is true or not…and they also said that in sahi bukhari
    Al-nazai bin sabra said: hazrat ali R.A offered johar prayer and sat down in the wide courtyard (of the mosque) of kufa in order to deal with affairs of the people till the asar prayer become due.then water baought to him and he drank some of it his washed his face, hands…Sahi bukhari vol-7 book 69 H#520 and mentioned that the narrator has missed to mention rub or wipe feet and hands and they claiming that we are trying to hide the truth and they mention another hadees from
    musnad al-Teyalsi
    Al-nazai bin sabra said hazrat ali R.A offered johar prayer in rahba and sat down to respond to the affair of the people, then asar prayer become due then he bough um water and poured handful water washed his face and hands then he wiped his head and feet.

    which hadees are correct and why? and one more thing i want to say here that here they mention that after zohar prayer ali R A sat down and deal with public affair till asr prayer due…it means hazarat Ali R.A didnt pray two prayer together like shia hazrat praying…correct…

    • salam akhi:
      of-course that shia is misguiding you:

      the hadith from bukhari he showed you is half-quoted.

      here is the complete hadith from Volume 7, Book 69, Number 520:
      Narrated An-Nazzal bin Sabra: ‘Ali offered the Zuhr prayer and then sat down in the wide courtyard (of the Mosque) of Kufa in order to deal with the affairs of the people till the ‘Asr prayer became due. Then water was brought to him and he drank of it, washed his face, hands, head and feet. Then he stood up and drank the remaining water while he was standing. and said, “Some people dislike to drink water while standing thought the Prophet did as I have just done.”

      link of above hadith is here: http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/sunnah/bukhari/069.sbt.html

      Note: As you can see how he showed his rafidi nature by removing above bolded-italic words.

      & about second hadith:
      1. I don’t think he gave you correct translation. Who knows he again misquoted the hadith like first hadith?
      2. If we go into SUNNI HADITH SICENCE: then, second hadith is considered weak in the view of the EXTREMELY SAHIH HADITH from bukhari [above]. So it is rejected without any doubt.
      3. We have other hadith from Ali(ra) that he washed his feet:
      Sunnan abi Dawud :: Book 1 : Hadith 111
      Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:
      Abdu Khayr said: Ali came upon us and he had already offered prayer. He called for water. We asked: What will you do with water when you have already offered prayer? – Perhaps to teach us. A utensil containing water and a wash-basin were brought (to him).
      He poured water from the utensil on his right hand and washed both his hands three times, rinsed the mouth, snuffed up water and cleansed the nose three times. He then rinsed the mouth and snuffed up water with the same hand by which he took water. He then washed his face three times, and washed his right hand three times and washed his left hand three times. He then put his hand in water and wiped his head once.
      He then washed his right foot thrice and left foot thrice, then said: If one is pleased to know the method of performing ablution of the Apostle of Allah, this is how he did it.

      Link of above hadith: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=1&translator=3&start=55&number=0094

      & yes you are correct in your view that: “hazarat Ali R.A didnt pray two prayer together like shia hazrat praying”.

      I think this will help u lot.


  2. Firoz

    can you please go through this link and let me clear some points which he quoted from bukhari sharif..

    thank you in advance

    • salam akhi,
      he quoted 2 narrations, as i can see.
      1. At 7:06: It is sharah i.e. explanation, it is not hadith from bukhari. & i didnot found any hadith from bukhari which claim that “Ibn Abbas said For Wudhu two parts should be washed and two parts should be wiped. Allah (swt) gave the order to wipe and people in opposition to Allah (swt) began to wash”!

      but i found this hadith from Ibn Abbas:
      Bukhari :: Book 1 :: Volume 4 :: Hadith 142
      Narrated ‘Ata’ bin Yasar:
      Ibn ‘Abbas performed ablution and washed his face (in the following way): He ladled out a handful of water, rinsed his mouth and washed his nose with it by putting in water and then blowing it out. He then, took another handful (of water) and did like this (gesturing) joining both hands, and washed his face, took another handful of water and washed his right forearm. He again took another handful of water and washed his left forearm, and passed wet hands over his head and took another handful of water and poured it over his right foot (up to his ankles) and washed it thoroughly and similarly took another handful of water and washed thoroughly his left foot (up to the ankles) and said, “I saw Allah’s Apostle performing ablution in this way.”

      link: http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/bukhari/001.004.142.html

      ^As u can see Ibn ‘Abbas[ra] himself performed wudu by washing foot.

      2. At 8:23 discussed before.

      As a whole, the complete video is clearly to deceive layman.


  3. real islam

    Salam Aleikom to all,

    Thank you brother for your full explanations. However, you need to be more careful when using certain words which describe a sect of religion, since there are many people among them who really want to seek the truth, no matter how hard it is. I am by birth a shia and married a sunni. I have performed my prayers separately, as I have seen many other shia’s do the same. The majority of shia however, follow what mullahs dictate and present as Islam, and therefore, brainwashed to the point that they agree to whatever they are presented with. But they are logical and if you give them enough logic and hadeeth, they will accept you. I tried all my best to tell shia’s around me to perform their prayers separately for several reason:

    1- There is not a single hadeeth or reference to any Imam’s prayer styles that they have joined their prayers. (except in difficult times, such as difficult travelling or shortage of time that was even mentioned during prophet’s time within sahabas).
    2- I often tell shia’s if the prayers should be joined, why there are different names for different prayers, i.g., zohr salat, vs. asr salat (the reason it is called asr not zohr, is that it should be performed in asr time; otherwise prophet would have said perform 8 rokkats of zohr prayer instead!!!)
    3- In all Islamic texts, including both sunni and shia, prayers are referred to as 5 times prayer. five TIMES has a specific meaning, as the word ‘times’ denote. (i.g., we eat meals three times a day, breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and hence with different names!!) If the prayers were meant to be performed together, prophet would have said perform three times, since each time would have contained two, except the single fajr paryer. !!

    After presenting these reasons to many people of shia, they accepted it and they started to separate their performance of prayers. and I believe it is misguidance that causes such differences in Islamic performances.

    About the difference in wudu, I must admit that I am still having my researches to find out the truth, and meanwhile I follow my husband’s wudu style that is sunni, and hence I wash my feet. Since according to Islam, a woman’s Islamic duty is with her husband’s and if she follows her husband because her husband asks her to do that, there is no responsibility for her. But for the sake of understanding the truth about wudu, I am trying to make a more profound research and consider both parties’ arguments, and then analyse them based on Arabic Quranic grammar and sahih hadeeth. May Allah guide me and whoever is seeking truth.

    Please help me with any useful research articles or books which lead me to my answer.

    ‘The path to seek the truth is meandering and sometimes deceiving; be steady and never label people, for they might turn out better than you in eyes of Allah’

    • salam sis,
      As u said: “Since according to Islam, a woman’s Islamic duty is with her husband’s and if she follows her husband” <– here i disagree with u, my fiancee is also shia, but this doesn't mean i only say here to do the things without any clarifications from quran & hadith. She alwz ask me & i give details to her by taking QURAN as first reference & SAHIH HADITH as second..
      As u said: “But for the sake of understanding the truth about wudu, I am trying to make a more profound research and consider both parties’ arguments, and then analyse them based on Arabic Quranic grammar and sahih hadeeth” <– sis that research is actually took FULL QURANIC GRAMMER into consideration & i wrote this article after long debate/discussion with shia's & what i found shia says: U HAVE TO WIPE FOOT BECAUSE IF U REMOVE GRAMMER FROM THIS QURANIC VERSE, IT SAYS TO WIPE!! Then i said: HOW CAN U REMOVE GRAMMER!!?? IN THIS WORLD EACH & EVERY SENTENCE USES GRAMMER & ARABIC IS FULL OF ADVANCE GRAMMER, THEN WHO CAN U THINK OF REMOVING GRAMMER!!??

      As u said: “Please help me with any useful research articles or books which lead me to my answer.” <– do u know urdu!!?? it is good book on wudu here: http://www.jmmpak.net/bokwazu-ka-masnon-tareqa.html


      • Y. C

        Islamistruth, sister, how can you get engaged to a shia when you know how missguided they are? Their religion is not islam and this is not about wudu, its about their belief in imamah and other things that constitute shirk and kufur. Know their religion and you will see how it is haram to marry from them.

    • Y. C

      Shias are logical? Since when? if they are logical they wouldnt believe in imamah nor say ya ali, ya hussein, ya mahdi, ya zahra etc. I advice you to leave shiaism and join islam in case you havent done that already. Shiaism is not islam, just like christianity is not what christ (as) taught.

  4. ABE

    wow!! thats exactly why so many of us leave sunni-ism for following ahlul bayt, after that loooong explanation to twist out of it, tell us brother in which other language do you get this phenomena? one verb says about two nouns: wash x AND y, which means wash BOTH!! then next verb about two nouns wipe y AND z, which means wipe BOTH, not so? NO!! TELL US ONE THING BROTHER, SHOW US ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN QURAN OR ANYWHERE ELSE IN ARABIC ABOUT THIS MANNER OF GRAMMAR

  5. Masha Allah A B E Parkar , excellant , the world needs such enlightened Sunnies . You explained so nicely , so simply , that is the truth and I am
    not the one who is against Sunnis as such , but this fake site Islamistruth
    always speak nonsense , they are always trying to twist and turn the simple
    matter because their maslak are doing so from time immemorial , how they can admit they were all WRONG . That cancels their peeran e peer’s 1400
    years of prayers , actually that is the problem , it is not wash or wipes .
    They make fun of Google translate ha ha ha and right they are some times their translations are to such an absurdity that you can not make out anything , but they are a giant , they are not fools , they have done an unimaginable lots of work , their literal translation can not be wrong so making fun of them is showing ones own ignorance. Arjulikum and arjulakum make no difference and then let them tell me O K wash your feet then wherefrom comes the WIPE on
    socks and shoes permitted in Ahle Sunnah , which can be termed as the highest absurdity . There can be scene that you have , without knowing really
    are wiping on shoes which is made of murdaar haram Janwar Astaghferullah.

  6. ASIF


  7. Yahussien

    You sunhah are all going to hell astafuallah how can you say such things about shia you are indeed devils and idiots when Oman Mahdi comes you will be the losers and we will see who will be laughing at the end

    • Yacoub

      “Yahussien” mushrik. According to Allah swt, it is you mushriks who say ya ali ya hussein, ya jesus, ya lat, ya budda etc who are going to hell. You will be losers not only in the next life but in this life as well. Now please tell me, since your so convinced of shiaism, where is imamah that you base your entire religion upon, mentioned in the quran – the unaltered words of God. Where?

  8. THis Yacoub who is such Jahil who can not even spell his name properly seem
    to be out of sense , a pagal . He has problem If some one calls Ya Ali (a),Ya Husain (a), ask this idiot if the Rasool e Kareem(s) did not call ”Naad e Alian mazharal ajaeb” at Khaiber, was he committing a shirk/bikda’a maaz Allah , there is no limit you tell these fools the truth but the truth will never sink in down their throat .
    The followers of son off illegiotimate are doomed for jahannum . OK let them wash their feet before going to hell , may be some releif till the water evaporates .

    • The Prophet (saw) did not such thing. It is one of the fabrications of those in whose sect lying is permitted.

    • Yacoub

      What is wrong with you pagan shias? Its not enough you comitt shirk, now you want to accuse the prophet (saw) of doing it as well? Subhan Allah, how lost you are. You are like christians and hindus. By the way, every time, your shia websites write that “sunni narrators, books and scholars” say something, then you can be sure that they are doing taqiya and lying. Every time shias want to proove a point they give you a list of fake statements allegdly coming from muslim scholars when in reality its all lies or deliberate missquotings.
      Also, there is a diffirence between saying ya (insert whatever name) if that person is in the same room and your adressing him, and with saying ya (insert name) when that person cant hear you nor help you. That is what pagans of quraysh used to do – look in the quran what Allah’s (swt) reply was to them.

      You keep saying ya ali and we will say ya allah. Lets see who is the right one in the end. Hint, if you want to know, just read the quran!! Now, please show me where is imamah mentioned in the quran?
      And as for my name, dont worry about its spelling, perhaps i am from a country that uses c as k? But i dont expect a shia to understand that. You guys make dua by asking ali (ra) instead of allah (swt) yet claim to follow islam so there is no logic nor common sence with you mushriks.


    • Because what you quoted and attributed to the Prophet (saW) is a fabrication.

      No doubt the Prophet (saw) would call on his companions including Ali (ra) but He (saw) never made this Shirki statement about Ali (ra), that you quoted: “Naad e Alian mazharal ajaeb”.

  10. Yacoub

    Shia logic = saying ya allah is inferior to saying ya ali. Asking allah who can hear us always is inferior to asking ali who can not hear us nor answer our call. That is shia logic. Shiites are mushriks, let every muslim know it.

  11. Naved Mahdi

    Dear Brothers in Faith,

    First of all lets us all shun arrogance and seek for Allah’s divine guidance to keep us on the right path. None can be guided until Allah wills so.
    Please read below link by Shia scholars were there are enough proofs for the translation of the Quranic Ayats and lets still keep praying for Allah that they keep us on the right path and foil the plans of devil to make us deviate.

    [Admin Note: Links to Shia websites not allowed]

  12. Salamonalikum

    first of i am sunni but i love my shia brothers i dont care how you pray or how you wash as long as you say the shahada and face the kaba then i am not better or worse than you only god knows and can be our judge. what i find so strange is that during the life of the prophet and a few generations after that the muslims approach was to be “kind/merciful” first than to be “right” but after that came the ways of the sword and force. musims killed each other over power and differences in background. even till today we have this mentality of aggressiveness and impulsiveness, we pray 5 times a day asking and begging the creator for his mercy but yet we show so little of it. we pass judgement on each other by such harsh measures over chicken feet and popcorn only to stamp someone with a “murtad, kafir” seal. if someone wipes or washes his feet LET THEM BE only they will answer for it NOT YOU. as it is stated that on the day of judgement we will all run like cowards from our children, spouses and parents because no one wants to be burdened by others. in some sunni school of thought the mentality is like the catholic faith you practice traditions without question and you get punished and condemned when you step out of line if you made a mistake which may seem like a sin. we use the Quran like a sword when it is meant to be a reminder full of kindness and mercy first then followed by warning. we tell people its so extremely hard to get to paradise but yet very easy to go to hell fire when in reality its the opposite. one of the most striking thing about some “good” muslims is that as they go higher in faith they become harsher/bolder/meaner to others by looking down on them for not knowing the rules. again i say to you, will your kindness come first or your wrath ? it may come as a surprise to some when that same order is applied to them on the day of judgement. only the creator knows best.

    p.s. i attended a shia school and know them very well and believe it or not sunni and shia have almost 95% in commonality but yet some people try to portray it as the opposite. dont let other peoples hate become inject into yours. love trumps hate 🙂

    • Muslim


      Wa alaykum assalam.

      Are you saying you are ok with shiites calling on the dead? Ok with shiites lying upon Allah by claiming he created 12 holy infallible sucessors to the Prophet sallalahu alayhi wassalam that are better than most prophets?
      Ok with shiites rejecting the sahabah? Ok with shiites slandering umm almumineen? And all their other nonsense and lies.

      Your comment is emotional and ilogical. Please humble yourself and realize that imam ash shafii, imam malik, imam abu hanifa and imam ahmad and those other great scholars of Islam knew very well what they were talking about when they condemned the shia beliefs. You think you solved the dispute simply because you went to a shia school?

      Don’t be so naive if you really are a sunni and not just another one of those deceiving shiites doing taqiyah by praising shiites and shiaism while pretending to be sunni.

      • puppykaf

        emotional ? illogical? not even close but your blanket judgement and lack of experience with the shia shows my friend. you know pursuing perfection sometimes leads you to absolute blindness perhaps you should stand in front of a mirror yourself to reflect sometimes.

        calling on the dead and doing all kinds of cultural rituals is in all mazhabs including in our sunni community. just go to pakistan, india, turkey, egypt and so on. its a bit hypocritical to say shias have these practices but instead it would be fair to say that all people have good and bad in them. i am telling you from personal experience which you seem to lack, that NOT all shias believe in the stereotypes you believe in or the negativity you seem to project. on a final note, even in the quran Allah says there is good among the people of the book even though one could say their “all” misguided but i will take it a step deeper. when the prophet was coming back to take mecca, which had pretty much purged all of its musims by then, came down revelations that to not attack the city because there is believers among them. in a moment of impulsiveness and rush to judgement we forget that just b/c passes down a judgement does not give you the right to pass that judgement just because you happen to think your on the right path. so my friend choose your words carefully b/c after all its those exact words you will have to defend on the day of judgement.


      • Muslim

        It’s very simple, we look at what their sect stands for. There is a difference between a deviant who calls himself sunni but has no legs to stand on when it comes to offering the daleel for his deviance and a shia who follows a sect that preaches all those things as the standard.

        Our scholars and imams are more trustworthy than your “experiences with the shia”. I have a shia neighbor, we greet eachother and are nice to eachother when we see eachother, that does not mean their belief change just because i have a positive experience with a shia. Will this shia name their kid aisha or umar just because we were nice to eachother? No. They don’t use these names because they consider these people to be wrongdoers.

        The fact that they have the taqiyyah concept further makes your “experience” arguement illogical.

        If a shia isen’t practicing shiaism then that is because he is ignorant of shiaism or non-religious or making taqiyyah. He can’t be used as a proof. When their top scholars preach those things then that is what counts.

        Yes there are good jews and christians and who are these good jews and christians? They are the ones who recignize the truth of Islam when it reaches them. So that is irrelevent here.

        And what does the issue of not attacking the people of makka has to do with my comment? The believers in makkah were believers who believed in what rasoulillah sallalahu alayhi wassalam came with and had special circumstances due to the situation. They were not a sect that strayed from the sunnah. Nor did i mention to attack anyone.

        You’re bringing up irrelevent things because you’re looking at it from an emotional perspective.

        Exactly what words of mine is it that you feel i should fear being questioned about on yawm alqiyamah and are you aware that your words defending falsehood are something to truly fear?

        Please no more emotional and irrelevent arguements. You have to use your intellect, surely it can’t be hard to understand that you attending a shia school does not count more than what the scholars who actually know shiaism and how it goes against Islam said? Not to forget the words of the major shia scholars themselves?

        Shia kids are not a proof.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s