Appearance
Verses 6–7
The first verse contains rules of all three types of al-Tahārah (cleanness): wudūʾ, wājib ghusl and tayammum; and the second verse emphasizes or complements this order. There is another verse already mentioned in the chapter of “Women” which deals with these three modes of cleanness: O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know (well) what you say, nor when you are in a state of major ritual impurity, unless (you are) travelling on the road—until you have washed yourselves; and if you are sick or on a journey or one of you comes from the privy or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to clean earth, then wipe a part of your faces and (a part of) your hands. Surely Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving ().
This verse of the chapter of “The Table” is clearer than that of the chapter of “Women” and covers more aspects of the rule. That is why we had not given a detailed commentary there, until we have reached the verse under discussion here.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُوا ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَىٰ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لَامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَٰكِنْ يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ ٦
(5:6) O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles; and if you are under obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves); and if you are sick or on a journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have touched the women, and you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith; Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you so that He may complete His favor on you, that you may be grateful.
al-Qiyām (to stand up, to rise up), when followed by preposition ilā (to) generally connotes the intention of doing that thing; because when one intends to do a thing one usually moves towards it. Let us suppose a man is sitting and he intends to perform an act, usually he would rise to do it. In other words, rising up for a work is inseparable from its intention. There is a similar example in the words of God: And when you are among them and establish the prayer for them (), that is, you intend to establish the prayer. Conversely, there is a verse which uses the word wish or intention to allude to the actual deed: And if you wish to have (one) wife in place of another and you have given one of them a heap of gold, then take not from it anything (); it means when you divorce a wife and marry another; so the verse uses the word “wish” for the actual deed.
In short, the verse shows that prayer must be preceded by bath and wudūʾ. If it had been unrestricted it would have meant necessity of wudūʾ before every prayer irrespective of the words: and if you are under obligation to preform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves). However, legislative verses are seldom unrestricted in all aspects. Moreover, it is possible to say that the coming words: but He wishes to purify you, explain this obligatoriness of bath, as will be explained later. It is only this much explanation that can be given here for this verse; the exegetes have written at length about it but it is all related to the matter of fiqh and not to tafsīr.
... wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows: al-Ghusl (pouring water on something); it is usually done for cleaning, removal of dirt and filth. al-Wajh (the side of a thing that faces you); but mostly it is used for the front side of man’s head, that is, the side which has eyes, nose and mouth in it; when somebody faces you his features become manifest to you; the traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt interpret it as the area from the beginning of the hairline in the forehead up to the tip of the chin length wise and that which is covered by the thumb and middle finger breadthwise. There are some other delineation mentioned by the exegetes and jurisprudents.
al-Aydī (plural of al-yad); it is the organ which is used for folding and unfolding, catching and releasing, attacking someone, etc. It begins from shoulder ending at fingertips. Because most of these activities like catching and releasing are done through that part which begins from elbow down wards, that section is also called hand; and for this very reason the section from wrist to fingertips is also called hand. In this way, the word becomes common between the whole and its’ parts.
It is this commonality which makes it necessary to mention some association to point to the intended meaning; and it is for this reason that God has added: “as far as the elbows” to show that the area of the hand to be washed is that which ends at the elbows; also it shows that the whole area up to the finger tips is covered. The traditions also support this meaning. The preposition ilā (to, as far as) indicates the limit of action and it connotes continuation of movement. This preposition does not show whether or not the elbows are included in the order of washing; the order to wash the elbows is derived from the traditions, not from this preposition.
Someone has said that the preposition ilā in this verse means “together with” as is seen in the verse: and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property (). He has also argued on the strength of traditions that the Prophet used to wash the elbows in wudūʾ. It is really an astonishing insolence in exegesis of the Divine Book. Let us say that the tradition describes an action, but an action may be interpreted in different ways. How can it be used to pinpoint the meaning of a word? Or it may legislate a rule without intending to explain this verse. Moreover, the obligatoriness of washing the elbows could have been inferred from logical reasonings; or may be the Prophet has added to it, because he had the authority to do so (as he had done in the five prayers, as the correct traditions say). As for the verse: and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property, the word: al-akl (to devour) contains the idea of addition and joining and for this reason it is followed by the preposition: ilā; it is not that ilā gives the meaning of togetherness.
The above discussion makes it clear that the clause: “as far as the elbows,” qualifies the words, “your hands.” It does not clarify where the washing of hands is to begin and where it is to end. So far as this clause is concerned, the washing could begin from the elbows going to the fingertips (and that is the way man acts while washing his hand apart from wudūʾ) or it could begin from fingertips ending at the elbows. But the traditions from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt guide us to follow the former method, instead of the latter.
This removes the objection raised by many people that the clause: “as far as the elbows” proves the obligatoriness of beginning the washing from fingertips ending at the elbows. This claim is based on the assumption that the clause: “as far as the elbows,” is related to the order of washing; but, as we have explained, it is connected with the hands. It should be realized that the word “hands,” being a common noun, needed an association to make its meaning clear, and once the word “elbows” connects with “hands” it cannot be again connected with the order of washing.
Moreover, the ummah unanimously agrees that the wudūʾ of those who begin washing from the elbows coming to the fingertips is correct (vide Majmaʾ al-bayān). And this unanimity emanates from the fact that the verse gives this meaning and it could only be correct if the clause: “as far as the elbows,” is connected with the “hands” and not with the washing.
... and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles: al-Mash (to let the hand or any other limb pass over something). They say: ‘I wipe the thing’; ‘I wiped part of the thing’ (bi-shayʾ). When this verb is used without preposition it indicates wiping of the whole thing; and when used with the preposition bi, it denotes partial wiping. The Divine words: “and wipe a part of your heads,” show that only a part of the head is to be wiped; however it doesn’t show which parts are to be wiped. It is known only from the traditions. Our correct traditions say that it is the front part of the head.
The words, wa arjulakum has been recited in two ways:
With kasrah (-la-) of (wa arjulikum): In this case it is clearly in conjunction with bi-ru’ūsikum that is, “and wipe a part of your heads and your feet.” Some people say that this kasrah here has no grammatical significance; it just follows the inflection of the preceding word, bi-ruʾūsikum. But it is a mistake because following in inflection is considered a bad grammar as grammarians have said; and the Divine words should not be taken in such a vulgar way.
With fathah of (-la-) (wa arjulakum). If you read the sentence without any preconceived idea you will see that arjulakum is in conjunction with the grammatical position of bi-ruʾūsikum [which is in dative case and should have been ruʾūsakum but for the preposition bi]. You will understand that the verse shows the obligatoriness of washing the face and hands and wiping the head and feet. You will never think that the word: “and your feet” should be connected to the clause: “wash your faces” in the beginning of the verse, while another order to wipe the parts of the heads has already come in between. A man of good literary taste will not try such gymnastics in a speech of high literary value. How can a speaker of high standards agree to say for example: ‘I kissed the face of Zayd and his head and touched his shoulder and hands’, when he actually want to say that he had kissed the hands also?
Numerous traditions for wiping the feet have been narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. As for the traditions of Ahl al-Sunnah, they do not purport to explain the wordings of the Qur’an; they rather describe the action of the Prophet and fatwā of some companions. However they differ among themselves: Some show the obligatoriness of wiping the feet, while the others support their washing.
However, overwhelming majority of the Sunnīs has given preference to the traditions of washing over those of wiping; but one should not entangle with them here because it is a matter of jurisprudence, and the arguments and counter-arguments are more appropriate for a book of fiqh. However, they have tried to fit the verse on a ruling of fiqh which they have accepted and have written various contrived reasons for it; but the verse does not agree with such interpretations unless one is prepared to pull it down from the peak of eloquence to the depth of incoherence.
Some people have said that arjulakum (with fathah of -la-) is in conjunction with: “wash your faces”; and if it is recited arjulikum (with kasrah of -li-), then it just follows bi-ruʾūsikum. But we have already explained that such interpretations are not worthy of a speech of high literary standard.
[The author has then quoted some more abstruse grammatical interpretations of the partisans of washing. We have omitted them because they were beyond the grasp of non-Arabic speaking readers. (Trans.)]
Someone even while reciting with kasrah of “-li-” has tried to show obligatoriness of washing of feet. He says that the conjunction is in its place [that is, “your feet” is in conjunction with “wipe a part of your heads”;] yet wiping is a shortened form of washing and therefore wiping of feet means their washing! Then he supports his argument by saying that the verse mentions the limits of the washed organ only that is, the hands and does not limit the wiped organ that is, the head; now when it limits the wiped organ by saying: “and your feet to the ankles,” we know that it wants them to be washed!
This is the worst type of argument. Wiping is totally different from washing and there is no inseparable connection between them. Apart from that, why should only the feet be washed and the head be left for wiping? Would that I knew what prevents him from interpreting the word mash wherever it appears in the Qur’an or traditions as washing and vice versa. Why should not the traditions of washing taken as to mean wiping and the traditions of wiping as meaning washing? In this way all the proofs will turn topsy-turvy without any clear end. As for his supporting reason he turn was tried in it to impose a meaning on the word through analogy and it is the worst type of analogy.
[Again the author quotes here some reasoning to show that wiping and washing are not two separate actions; and then replies to it. We have omitted it because of its abstruseness. (Trans.)]
This and similar contrived reasonings which this verse has been made to suffer go against its manifest meaning; their only aim is to justify traditions of washing in a way that they should not appear to be going against the Qur’an. If we open the door for imposing the theme of a tradition on a verse by twisting the apparent meaning of that verse then nobody could be found guilty of going against the Qur’an. There is a better way for the believers in the washing of the feet to follow. They should say as some early muhaddithīn (like Anas and al-Shaʾbī) are reported as saying that Gabriel had brought wiping and the sunnah is washing. It means abrogation of the Book by the Sunnah and the subject will turn from the tafsīr to the Principles of Jurisprudence: whether or not the Sunnah can abrogate the Book. When an exegete says that a certain tradition is against the Book, he means to say that the connotation of this tradition goes against the apparent meaning of the Book. He shows the conflict of the tradition with the Qur’an, not that he gives a fatwā for a rule of the shariah.
Now, we come to the words: “to the ankles”: al-Kaʾb is the bone protruding on the dorsum of the foot. Some people say that it is the bone protruding at the joint of the leg and foot. In this meaning there are two such bones at the joint of each foot and leg.
... and if you are under obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves): al-Junub is an infinitive verb but is generally used in the meaning of active participle; that is why it is used for both genders as well as for singular, dual and plural. When they want to use a word as an infinitive verb, they say al-janābah.
This sentence is in conjunction with the clause: wash your faces, as the verse is meant to show the necessary stipulation of cleanliness for prayer. The sentence means: perform a total ablution if you are in al-janābah. This condition alludes to an unspoken condition in wudūʾ. The verse then will mean: wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles, if you are not junub; and if you are junub, then perform a total ablution. It may be inferred from it that wudūʾ is prescribed if there is no janābah, but with janābah the ghusl is enough as the traditions show.
The same law has been explained in the verse of the chapter of “Women”: nor when you are in a state of major ritual impurity—unless (you are) travelling on the road—until you have washed yourselves (). The verse under discussion is more elaborate as it names the bath as cleanliness. This cleanliness is other than that which one usually gets from taking bath which it is an effect of that bath; but the cleanliness mentioned in this verse refers to the very act of taking bath (as it removes spiritual uncleanness); while in this context removing physical uncleanness and dirt from the body by using water is called al-Tanazzuf. There is a tradition from Imam: “Whatever water flows on becomes clean.” This rule is inferred from this very verse.
... and if you are sick or on a journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have touched the women, and you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth: Now begins the rule which applies to a person who does not have water for cleansing or bath. The four situations which are joined with the particle of conjunction “or” are not opposite to each other in reality; sickness and journey by themselves do not cause al-hadath (the things because of which wudūʾ or ghusl becomes necessary); they may demand wudūʾ or ghusl when a small or big hadath takes place in that condition. The last two alternatives do not stand face to face with the first two; rather both of the first two alternatives are divided into the last two. That is why someone has said that “or” in the clause: “or one among you comes from privy,” is used in the meaning of “and,” as we shall describe later. Moreover, the reasons justifying tayammum are not limited to sickness or journey; there are other causes too.
God has mentioned sickness and journey and in these two conditions one is generally unable to get or use water whenever he wishes; and He has mentioned coming from toilet and touching the women—and unavailability of water in these two conditions is a matter of chance. Conversely, it may be said that looking at the physical structure of man, his being sick or on journey is a matter of chance while going to toilet or touching of the women are physical necessities. The first causes small hadath, which is removed by wudūʾ and the second brings on big hadath which is removed by ghusl. In all the four situations with which man becomes involved sometimes by chance and at other times by nature, he is obliged to do tayammum when he cannot get water.
Unavailability of water metaphorically denotes inability to use water. It means that unavailability of water is a condition for all the four situations including sickness.
The above explanation shows that:
First: The sickness mentioned in this verse is the one, which prevents a man from using water as the condition: “and you do not find water” shows; rather the context of the whole speech gives this connotation.
Second: “Or on a journey” is another alternative in which man is involved by chance and during which sometime water becomes unavailable; it is not restricted by the words: “or one among you comes from privy”; rather it is in conjunction with the words: “wash your faces.” So the meaning will be as follows: When you rise up for prayer while you are on a journey and you do not find water then do tayammum. As the sentence: when you rise up to prayer, wash your faces ... had not required any conditional clause, this order of tayammum also does not need any such condition as both are in conjunction with each other.
Third: The Divine words: “or one among you comes from the privy” is another independent situation. Someone has said that “or” has been used here in the meaning of “and”; as God has said in another context: And We sent him to a hundred thousand, rather, they exceeded (87:147). But this interpretation is unwarranted. Apart from that, the word “aw” (or, rather) in the verse brought in evidence is not in the meaning of “and”; it is used in its literal meaning as we have translated it with the word “rather.” It does not show that the speaker was unsure of their number; it just means that the situation or condition was indefinite. The same interpretation is given to other such expressions whenever they occur in the Qur’an. For example: ... so that you may guard (against evil), (); ... had they but known this ().
This sentence has the same construction of conjunction as the previous two. The meaning will be: When you rise up to prayer and one of you had come from privy and you do not find water then you should do tayammum.
It may easily be inferred from these wordings that when a man has not broken his al-Tahārah (here it means wudūʾ or tayammum) with small hadath then he does not have to repeat his wudūʾ or tayammum; it supports those ahādīth which show that a man who has done tahārah is not obliged to repeat it.
The Divine words, “or one among you comes from privy” teach good manner; al-ghāit (a depressed plot or pit); people used to sit in such places to relieve themselves in order to be hidden from public eyes; the Qur’an uses the expression “coming from depressed place or privy” and it alludes to relieving oneself. Nowadays, the word al-ghāit is used for human excrements but it is a vulgar usage, which has come up in later centuries. The same is the position of al-ʾadhrah; its literal meaning is threshold of the door. As the people used to empty their lavatory in front of their houses, the word al-ʾadhrah gradually came to mean faeces, as al-Jawharī has explained in al-Sihāh.
Also, the Qur’an has not said: “or you come from privy”; because it would have pinpointed the one involved. Nor has it said: “or one of you has come from privy” because this possessive construction too would have shown a sort of specification. Rather, it went further in vagueness and ambiguity and said: “or one among you comes from privy.” This was done to teach Muslims polite manner of speaking.
Fourth: “Or you have touched the women.” This too, like previous clauses, is an independent condition; and the conjunction and the meaning are like previous phrases. Touching the women is an allusion to sexual intercourse. This too, shows the polite manner of speech, as to how one should keep one’s tongue from clearly expressing what the human nature doesn’t like to talk freely about.
One might say that, in that case, the preceding expression, “and if you are under obligation to perform a total ablution,” would have been more appropriate because it was more decent; but it would have missed the main point of the speech. The present expression shows that it is something, which a man by nature is inclined to do, while the previous phrase lacks this indication.
Someone has said that “touching the women” means exactly what it says and it doesn’t indicate sexual intercourse. However, it is a very wrong interpretation because it goes against the context of the verse. God has begun the speech by describing the order concerning small hadath and that is wudūʾ, and then the order regarding big hadath, that is, janābah after which one normally has to take bath. Then the speech turns to these very situations in unusual circumstances, when one doesn’t get water; so it describes the substitute of wudūʾ, that is, tayammum. Now, the context demands that the substitute of bath too should be mentioned and that is why it has mentioned touching of the women alluding to sexual intercourse. There was no reason why only the substitute of wudūʾ should be mentioned ignoring that of ghusl altogether.
Fifth: The above explanations do not leave room for many objections brought against the verse as may be seen from the following:
The mention of sickness or being on a journey is irrelevant, because sickness or journey don’t obligate one to do tayammum unless one has undergone a hadath or has touched the women; but the small hadath and the sexual intercourse would make tayammum necessary even if one is not sick or on journey.
Reply: Small hadath and sexual intercourse are not to be joined with sickness and journey; all four are independent situations as was explained earlier.
The second alternative “or on a journey” is irrelevant and the reason is the same as given in the first objection. Sickness is an excuse, which can prevent use of available water; it does not indicate unavailability of water. Therefore, it was necessary to say “and you do not find water”; and in absence of water [one has to do tayammum]; so being sick or on a journey has no relevance here.
Reply: The phrase: “and you do not find water” is an allusion to in-ability to use water, no matter whether it is because of unavailability of water or otherwise.
It was enough to say: “you do not find water,” and all the situations mentioned before it would be covered in this one phrase; so if the phrases: “if you are sick or on a journey or one among you comes from the privy or you have touched the women,” were omitted it would have been shorter and clearer.
Reply: If those phrases were omitted, all the fine points mentioned earlier would have been lost.
It would have been better if the phrase were changed to the following: “and if you are unable to use water,” because this amended phrase would have covered the sickness plus other excuses.
Reply: The present phrase alludes to that meaning too and it is more eloquent.
... betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith: al-Tayammum (to intend); al-Saʾīd (face of the earth) al-Tayyib, a thing is called tayyib when it is in its natural condition. This adjective used for the earth indicates that the earth should be in its natural condition like soil or common stones. It excludes the items, which are separated from earth by burning or through other natural processes like cement, potteries, and minerals. God says: And as for the good land, its vegetation springs forth (abundantly) by the permission of its Lord, and (as for) that which is bad (its herbage) comes forth but scantily (). This adjective has given rise to the conditions mentioned in traditions for the soil, which may be used in tayammum. Also, it is said that al-Tayyib means clean; in that case, it indicates the condition of cleanliness for the earth of tayammum.
The phrase: “and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith,” shows that one has to wipe those organs in tayammum which one was required to wash in wudūʾ. We may say that tayammum is a shortened alternative of wudūʾ from which the two wiping (of head and feet) have been omitted and the two washing (of face and hands) substituted with the wiping; and water has given way to soil—to remove hardships.
This shows that the two organs of tayammum are the same two which were washed in wudūʾ. As God has used the preposition “bi” with the verb of wiping, it indicates that the wiping in tayammum should apply to only some parts of the two organs, that is a part of face and a part of hands. It totally fits on the explanations narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt that the part of face to be wiped in tayammum is the forehead only and the part of hand to be wiped is from wrist downwards.
This explanation shows invalidity of some people’s opinion that the hand to be wiped in tayammum covers from armpit to finger tips; or what has been said by others that the whole part of hand washed in wudūʾ should be wiped in tayammum. Clearly, the verb al-mash (to wipe) followed by preposition “bi” indicates that only a part of the organ is to be wiped.
“Min” in “minhu” translated here as “therewith” shows that wiping of face and hands should begin with earth; and traditions have explained that tayammum should start with hitting the hands on earth and then wiping the face and hands with it.
Someone has said:
“Min” here indicates apportioning. In other words, there should remain attached to the palms some parts of earth (like dust) which would be used for wiping the face and the hands. According to him, tayammum would not be valid on a smooth stone on which there is no dust, etc.
Comment: The meaning that we have given is more in keeping with the wording of the Qur’an.
... Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty but He wishes to purify you: “Min haraj” (translated here as any difficulty) literally means any kind of difficulty. It puts emphasis on the negative connotation. There is no commandment in religion, which could create difficulty; that is why the negative is attached to the Divine desire and not to difficulty.
Difficulty can be of two types:
(1) A difficulty which results from the nature of the commandment itself; that is, the commandment itself becomes a source of difficulty. God hasn’t given any such order. For example, He has not forbidden eating tasty foods with a view of creating a knack for self-denial, because such an order would have created difficulty by its very nature.
(2) A difficulty, which temporarily happens in implementation of an order. For example, if someone cannot stand in prayer because of illness, this rule will be waived for him but the general rule will continue to apply to others.
The phrase: “but He wishes to purify you” after the preceding clause: “God does not desire to put on you any difficulty,” shows that God has not laid down any rule with the aim of creating difficulties for human beings. The verse means: Our aim in these laid down rules is to purify you and the main purpose is to complete our favors on you; not that We want to put you in trouble or difficulty. That is why when We found that wudūʾ or ghusl was difficult for you in the absence of water, We changed that order to tayammum which you can easily do; we have not totally waived the order of tahārah because we want to purify you and complete our favors on you, so that you may be grateful.
... but He wishes to purify you so that He may complete His favor on you that you may be grateful: The preceding explanation shows that the main purpose of wudūʾ, ghusl and tayammum is to make you purified through these modes of tahārah. This tahārah is not from al-khabath [an uncleanness which doesn’t require an-niyyah (intention) for its removal]; but it is a spiritual purification which one gets through these three modes of tahārah and which is the condition for validity of prayer.
It may be inferred from these words that if a person continues in tahārah and does not get any hadath, then he is not required to repeat his tahārah for the next prayer. Although the opening phrase: when you rise up to prayer, is unrestricted, it does not mean that one has to do wudūʾ, ghusl or tayammum before every prayer because not every order is obligatory. [In the situation mentioned above, one is only recommended to renew one’s tahārah.]
The clause: “so that He may complete His favor on you,” the meaning of favor and its completion was explained in the verse 3 of this chapter: This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed my favor on you; and the meaning of gratefulness was given in the verse 144 of chapter 3: And Allah will reward the grateful. Accordingly, the favor in this verse means the religion (not in the sense of its particular beliefs and commandments) but in the meaning of submission to God in all conditions and situations. This entails acceptance of God’s authority over His servants in whatever He obligates them to do. That authority will be completed if the shariah covers all religious commandments, small parts of which are the three types of tahārah.
The verse gives two reasons for this order; To purify the believers and to complete His favor on them.
These two are different from one another. The first reason gives the purpose of legislating the three modes of purification while completion of favor is the purpose of legislating the whole shariah, and the three modes of tahārah are a small part of it. In other words, the two reasons are particular and general. Accordingly, the clauses would mean as follows. We have laid down the three purifications so that you could purify yourselves with them. They are a part of the religion. When the whole shariah will be legislated, God’s favor on you will be completed in order that you may be grateful to God, so that He may choose you for Himself. Ponder on it.
وَاذْكُرُوا نِعْمَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَمِيثَاقَهُ الَّذِي وَاثَقَكُمْ بِهِ إِذْ قُلْتُمْ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۖ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ بِذَاتِ الصُّدُورِ ٧
(5:07) And remember the favor of Allah on you and the covenant with which He bound you firmly, when you said: “We have heard and we obey,” and fear Allah; surely Allah knows what is in the breasts.
That was the covenant which was taken from them. They were expected to surrender to God as God reminds them with the words: “when you said: ‘We have heard and we obey.’” It is unconditional listening and unconditional obedience; in other words, it is Islam. The favor of God in the clause: “And remember the favor of God on you,” points to the graceful gifts which God bestowed on them under protection of Islam. If they compared their condition in the days of ignorance with that after entering into Islam, they would find themselves enjoying peace, well-being, affluence, purity of hearts and purity of deeds; as God says: And remember the favor of Allah on you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts so by His bounty you became brethren; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire then He delivered you from it ().
Alternatively, the favor may refer to the reality of Islam; Islam is the mother of all favors that nourishes all other favors as we have described earlier. When we say that Divine favor refers to Islam or to Divine authority, we are aiming at pinpointing the examples of favor. We are not trying to find out the meaning of the word; meanings are known from dictionaries and we are not concerned with it here.
Then God reminds them of His Omniscience and that God knows the hidden secrets of the hearts. So, He has ordered them to fear Him: and fear Allah; surely Allah knows what is in the breasts.
Examining Narrations
- al-Tūsī narrates with his asnād from al-Ṣādiq about the words of God: when you rise up to prayer, that he said, “When you rise up from sleep.” The narrator (Ibn Bakīr) says, “I said ‘Does sleep break wudūʾ?’ He (the Imam) said, ‘Yes, when it overwhelms hearing and he doesn’t hear voices.’” (Tahdhīb al-ahkām).
Author’s comments: This meaning is also narrated in other tradi-tions and al-Suyūtī has narrated it in al-Durr al-manthūr from Zayd b. Aslam and al-Nahhās. It doesn’t go against the explanations given in the Commentary that rising up to prayer means intending to pray, because what we have said explains the meaning of “rising to” and the tradition explains the meaning of “rising from.”
- al-Kulaynī narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurārah that he said, “I said to Abū Jaʾfar, ‘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 Zurārah! The Messenger of God has said so and the Book has been revealed by God with this order, because God, 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 God explained it to the people but they neglected it. Then (God) 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 wudūʾ was waived in the absence of water, wiping (with earth) was ordered for part of (the organs) which were washed (in wudūʾ) 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 God 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 God said: Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty; and al-haraj means difficulty.’” (al-Kāfi).
Author’s comments: The clause: and (if) you do not find water, paraphrases the verse making its meaning clearer.
- Also al-Kulaynī narrates through his chain of narrators from Zurārah and Bakīr that both of them asked Abū Jaʾfar about the wudūʾ of the Messenger of God. 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 God, 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 God 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 God says: wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows. Then God 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 wudūʾ 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 God make your affairs good! One handful (of water) is enough for the face and one handful for the arm?’ (The Imam) said, ‘Yes, if you use it properly and two handfuls cover the whole wudūʾ.’” (ibid.)
Author’s comments: This tradition is well known; al-ʿAyyāshī has narrated it from Bakīr and Zurārah from Abū Jaʾfar and has narrated a similar tradition through Abdullāh b. Sulaymān from Abū Jaʾfar; also there are other traditions having similar connotation as well as of the preceding tradition in other books.
- al-ʿAyyāshī has narrated from Zurārah b. Aʾyan; and Abū Hanīfah has narrated from Abū Bakīr b. Hazm that they said, “A man did wudūʾ and did mash on his socks and entering the mosque performed his prayer. Then came there ʿAlī and trampled his neck under foot and said, ‘Woe unto you! You are praying without wudūʾ!’ He said, ‘ ʿUmar b. al-Khattāb has ordered me (to do wudūʾ like this).’ So, ʿAlī caught his hand, brought him to ʿUmar and said, ‘Look what this (man) is narrating from you (and his voice was raised).’ ʿUmar said, ‘Yes. I have ordered him (to do like it). Verily, the Messenger of God had done mash (in similar way).’ ʿAlī said, ‘Was it before the revelation of (the chapter of) “The Table” or after it?’ He said, ‘I don’t know.’ ʿAlī said, ‘Then why do you give fatwā when you don’t know. The Book (of God) has left socks behind.’” (Tafsīr al-burhān).
Author’s comments: There had appeared a controversy during the reign of ʿUmar about mash on socks, and it was the judgement of ʿAlī that it was abrogated by the verse of the chapter of “The Table,” as appears from the traditions. That is why it has been narrated from some companions like al-Barāʾ, Bilāl and Jarīr b. ʿAbdillāh that they had narrated from the Prophet, (permission of) mash on socks after revelation of the chapter of “The Table.” [In this way they tried to justify ʿUmar’s fatwā.] But these traditions are not free from confusion. Perhaps they thought that the abrogation of the wiping on socks was not based on the Qur’anic verse. But it is not so, because the verse confirms the wiping on the feet up to the ankles and socks are certainly not parts of the feet. The same is the connotation of the coming tradition.
- al-ʿAyyāshī narrates from Muḥammad b. Ahmad al-Khurāsānī (and the hadīth is marfūʾ) that he said, “A man came to the Leader of the Faithful, and asked him about the mash on socks. The Imam bowed his head for sometime; then he raised the head and said, ‘Verily God, the Blessed, the High, has ordered His servants to do tahārah and divided it among the organs; so He gave a share of it to the face and a share of it to the head and a share of it to the feet and a share of it to the hands. Now, if your socks are among these organs you may do mash on them.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- Again, he narrates from al-Hasan b. Zayd from Jaʾfar b. Muḥammad that he said, “Verily ʿAlī opposed the people in the reign of ʿUmar b. al-Khattāb regarding the mash on socks. They said, ‘We had seen the Prophet doing mash on socks.’ ʿAlī said, ‘Was it before the revelation of “The Table” or after it?’ They said, ‘We don’t know.’ ʿAlī, said, ‘But I know that the Prophet left wiping on the socks when “The Table” was revealed. And that I do mash on a donkey’s back is preferable to me than doing mash on the socks.’ Then he recited this verse: O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles.” (ibid.)
- al-Suyūtī writes: Ibn Jarīr and al-Nahhās (in his Nāsikh) have narrated about ʿAlī that he was doing (fresh) wudūʾ for each salāt and used to recite: O you who believe! When you rise up to prayer ... (al-Durr al-manthūr)
Author’s comments: Its explanation has been given earlier.
- al-Kulaynī narrates through his chain of narrates from al-Halabī from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, “I asked him (the Imam) about the words of God, the Mighty, the Great: or you have touched the women. He (the Imam) said, ‘It means sexual intercourse; but God is concealed and He prefers to cover. Therefore, He did not (clearly) name the act as you do.’” (al-Kāfī)
- al-ʿAyyāshī narrates from Zurārah that he said, “I asked Abū Jaʾfar, about tayammum. He said, ‘Verily ʿAmmār b. Yāsir came to the Prophet and said, “I was in condition of janābah and I had no water with me.” The Prophet asked. “What did you do? O ʿAmmār!” He said, “I removed my clothes and then I turned round over the earth.” (The Prophet) said, “The donkeys too do the same. God has said: and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith.” Then (the Prophet) put his hands together on the earth and wiped them. Then, he wiped from his forehead until below the eyebrows; then rubbed on hand with the other on the back of the palm, beginning with the right hand.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- Zurārah narrates from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “God laid down washing for the face and the arms, and mash, for the head and feet. When man happened to be overcome by journey, sickness or other needs, God removed the washing and changed it to wiping. Then he recited: and if you are sick or on a journey, or one among you comes from privy, or you have touched the women, and you do not find water, betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe a part of your faces and (part of) your hands therewith.” (ibid.)
- ʿAbd al-Aʾlā Mawlā Ãl Sām says, “I said to Abū ʿAbdillāh, ‘I stumbled and my nail was broken. So I put a bandage on my toe. How should I do wudūʾ?’ The Imam said, ‘The order for this and similar situations is known from the Book of God, the Blessed, the High: and (Allah) has not laid upon you any hardship in religion, ().’” (ibid.)
Author’s comments: This refers to the verse of the chapter of “The Pilgrimage” which disallows difficulties. The Imam did not refer the clause of the similar meaning in the verse of wudūʾ and went to the last verse of the chapter of “The Pilgrimage.” It shows that non-imposition of difficulty has the same meaning in both places. The traditions quoted above contain many fine points which may be understood if one keeps in mind the explanations we have given regarding these verse; that commentary may also be taken as explanation of the traditions.