Appearance
Sūrah al-Māʾidah, verse 6
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلاةِ فَاغْسِلُواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُواْ بِرُؤُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ وَإِن كُنتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُواْ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِّنكُم مِّنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاء فَلَمْ تَجِدُواْ مَاء فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم مِّنْهُ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ
Yā ayyuhā alladhīna āmanū idhā qumtum ilā aṣ-ṣalāti faghhsilū wujūhakum wa aydiyakum ilā al-marāfiq, wa imsaḥū biru’ūsikum wa arjulakum ilā al-kaʿbayn. Wa in kuntum junuban fa-iṭṭahharū. Wa in kuntum marḍā aw ʿalā safarin aw jā’a aḥadun minkum mina al-ghā’iṭ aw lāmastumu an-nisā’, fa-lam tajidū mā’an fatayammamū ṣaʿīdan ṭayyiban fa-imsaḥū bi-wujūhikum wa aydīkum minhu. Mā yurīdu Allāhu li-yajʿala ʿalaykum min ḥaraj, wa lākin yurīdu li-yuṭahhirakum wa li-yutimm niʿmatahu ʿalaykum laʿallakum tashkurūn.
O you who have faith! When you stand up for prayer, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe your heads, and your feet up to the ankles. And if you are in a state of ritual impurity, then purify yourselves. But if you are sick, or on a journey, or one of you comes from the toilet, or you have touched women, and you do not find any water, then take clean earth and wipe your faces and hands with it. Allah does not desire to cause you hardship, but He desires to purify you and complete His blessing upon you so that you may give thanks.
Context and significance
Verse of Sūrah al-Māʾidah lays down the Qur’ān’s most comprehensive instruction on ritual purification, outlining the requirements of wuḍūʾ (minor ablution), ghusl (major purification), and tayammum (dry ablution). Because purity is a precondition for prayer, this verse stands at the heart of Islamic ritual life, shaping daily practice for Muslims across generations.
Several key questions naturally arise when approaching its tafsīr:
Does the command “when you rise up to prayer” require ablution before every prayer, or only when one is in a state of impurity? The phrasing invites reflection on whether ablution is obligatory before each act of worship or conditional on the state of the worshipper.
What are the precise limits of each act of purification? The verse mentions washing the face and hands “to the elbows,” wiping the head, and addressing the feet “to the ankles.” Yet jurists and exegetes differed over the exact scope: does “to the elbows” include them or not? Does “wipe” apply to part of the head or all of it? And most debated of all, should the feet be washed or wiped?
What does the phrase “if you are under an obligation to perform a total ablution” mean in practice? The verse requires ghusl in cases of major impurity, but does this replace wuḍūʾ or come in addition to it?
How should tayammum be understood and applied? When water is absent or harmful, the Qur’an prescribes wiping the face and hands with “clean earth.” Does this include stone, sand, or any natural surface? How far up the arms should one wipe, and how is “clean earth” defined?
What is the purpose of these acts of purification? The verse itself provides a rationale: “Allah does not desire to put upon you any hardship, but He wishes to purify you and complete His favor upon you, so that you may give thanks.” How do exegetes explain this balance between legal precision and divine mercy?
By raising these questions, verse becomes more than a manual of ritual law. It opens a window onto the Qur’ān’s method of combining law with language, ritual with meaning, and purification with gratitude. Exegetes*—classical and modern—*have wrestled with its wording to extract both the precise rulings and the deeper spiritual intent.
What the exegetes say
At a glance
The question: In wuḍūʾ, does the verse require the feet to be washed or wiped?
Ibn KathīrLists washing the feet up to the ankles among the pillars of wuḍūʾ, citing ḥadīth ordering those who left their feet partly dry to repeat; permits wiping over khuffs as a concession.
ʿAllāmah ṬabāṭabāʾīHolds the feet are wiped: “your feet” is coordinated with the head inside the wiping clause, and reattaching it to the washing clause is rhetorically unworthy; neither recitation alters this.
Al-QurṭubīNotes variant readings, some suggesting washing and others allowing wiping, but reports that the majority of jurists hold washing the feet obligatory.
How each exegete answers the question, in one line. Click a name to read his reading in full.
Ibn Kathīr
In his commentary on Qur’an , Ibn Kathīr discusses the rulings related to wuḍūʾ (ritual ablution) and ṭahārah (purification), which Allah legislated as a prerequisite for prayer. He notes that at the beginning of Islam, Muslims were required to perform wuḍūʾ before every prayer, regardless of whether they were in a state of impurity or not. However, this obligation was later abrogated, such that performing wuḍūʾ became mandatory only when one was in a state of ḥadath (impurity), while otherwise it was recommended as an act of devotion and renewal. To illustrate this, Ibn Kathīr cites several reports in which the Prophet (s.a.w.) sometimes prayed multiple prayers with a single wuḍūʾ, while at other times he renewed it, showing both allowance and merit.
The verse itself lays out the pillars of ablution: washing the face, washing the hands and forearms up to the elbows, wiping the head, and washing the feet up to the ankles. Ibn Kathīr brings in numerous ḥadīth from the Companions that describe in detail how the Prophet (s.a.w.) performed wuḍūʾ, including rinsing the mouth and nose, washing the limbs three times, wiping the entire head, and ensuring completeness in washing. The Prophet strongly emphasized thoroughness, warning against leaving dry spots, particularly on the feet, and on more than one occasion ordered individuals who had left part of their feet dry to repeat their wuḍūʾ and prayer. From this, Ibn Kathīr underscores the necessity of carefully washing each required part.
He also includes the spiritual significance of wuḍūʾ. On the Day of Resurrection, believers will be recognized by the radiance on their faces, arms, and feet—the areas touched by wuḍūʾ. For this reason, he reports that the Prophet encouraged extending the washing slightly beyond the required limits to increase one’s radiance on that day. Other narrations highlight additional recommended acts, such as washing the hands upon waking before dipping them into water, washing between the fingers, and using the siwāk for cleanliness.
A further allowance discussed by Ibn Kathīr is the practice of wiping over khuffs (leather socks) instead of washing the feet, which is firmly established by authentic and numerous ḥadīth. This concession, practiced and approved by the Prophet (s.a.w.) repeatedly, reached the level of mutawātir transmission, leaving no doubt about its validity.
Finally, Ibn Kathīr turns to the provision of tayammum (dry ablution). If a person is sick, traveling, unable to find water, or otherwise incapable of using water, then he is permitted to strike clean earth and wipe his face and hands as a substitute for wuḍūʾ. Ibn Kathīr stresses that this is a manifestation of Allah’s mercy and facilitation for His servants, for Allah does not desire hardship in religion but rather purification and completion of His favor. The ruling ensures that no believer is deprived of prayer due to lack of water or inability to wash.
Through this verse, Ibn Kathīr shows how the Qur’an combines legal precision with spiritual meaning. Ablution is both a physical cleansing and a sign of divine favor, preparing the servant to stand before Allah in purity.
Source: Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged). Translated by Ṣafī al-Raḥmān. Vol. 3 (Chapter 5, Verse 6) Riyadh: Maktaba Dār-us-Salām, 2003.
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī reads verse as a prime example of the Qur’an’s precision, where law, language, and purpose converge. The opening phrase, idhā qumtum ilā al-ṣalāh (“when you rise up to prayer”), is not limited to the physical act of standing but, in common Arabic usage, means to set oneself toward something. Thus the verse establishes that prayer must be preceded by a state of ritual purity—wuḍūʾ or, when required, ghusl—without imposing the obligation of renewing ablution before every prayer unless it has been broken. The wording is unrestricted, but context and tradition clarify its intent.
When analyzing wuḍūʾ, Ṭabāṭabāʾī parses each noun and preposition carefully. The face (wujūh) to be washed runs from the normal hairline to the chin in length and the span between the thumb and middle finger in width, as clarified by traditions from the Ahl al-Bayt. The command to wash “your hands to the elbows” hinges on the preposition ilā. In Arabic, ilā indicates a limit but does not itself decide whether the limit is included or the direction of motion. Reports from the Imams specify that the elbows are included and that washing begins at the elbow and proceeds down to the fingertips. For Ṭabāṭabāʾī, this rules out forced readings of ilā as “with” or as proof of washing upwards from the fingers; grammatical semantics alone do not settle the practice, but authentic tradition does.
The clause “wipe a part of your heads and your feet to the ankles” is, for him, equally precise. The verb imsaḥū (“wipe”) when followed by bi- indicates partiality rather than totality, so wiping a part of the head suffices. The coordination of “your feet” with the head places them within the wiping clause, not the earlier washing clause. He critiques attempts to reattach “feet” to “wash your faces” across an intervening sentence or to claim that “wiping” is shorthand for washing, calling these readings rhetorically unworthy of the Qur’an’s eloquence. The variant recitations—wa arjulakum (accusative) and wa arjulikum (genitive)—do not alter this conclusion. On the meaning of “ankles” (al-kaʿb), he specifies that it refers to the protruding bone on the dorsum of the foot, not the side bones of the ankle joint.
Regarding ghusl, the phrase “if you are in a state of janābah, then purify yourselves” shows that ghusl suffices in place of wuḍūʾ, a point corroborated by both Qur’anic context and tradition.
The verse then sets out tayammum, providing a substitute when water cannot be used. The conditions—illness, travel, exiting the privy, or sexual contact—are joined by aw (“or”), indicating distinct alternatives. “Touching women” is understood as a Qur’anic euphemism for intercourse, fitting the context that has just mentioned janābah. The phrase “and you do not find water” extends to both literal absence and practical inability to use it. For tayammum, “clean earth” (ṣaʿīd ṭayyib) denotes the natural face of the earth—soil or unprocessed stone—rather than manufactured substances that no longer count as earth in common usage. The act of wiping replicates wuḍūʾ in shortened form: striking the earth and wiping part of the face and the hands. Again, the bi- in bi-wujūhikum indicates partiality, aligning with traditions that specify the forehead and the hands from the wrists down, rather than up to the elbows or armpits.
Finally, the verse closes with its rationale: Allah does not intend hardship, but purification and the completion of His favor, so that believers may give thanks. For Ṭabāṭabāʾī, this reveals both a specific and a general purpose. Specifically, wuḍūʾ, ghusl, and tayammum are forms of spiritual purification tied to prayer, not mere acts of physical hygiene. More generally, they embody the religion’s design as a system of mercy: devotion without intrinsic hardship, purification without arbitrariness, and gratitude nurtured through obedience. The substitution of tayammum is not a relaxation of the law but part of its coherence, ensuring that access to prayer is never barred by circumstances.
Source: Al-Mīzān fī Tafsīr al-Qur'ān, Eng. Vol. 10 under Chapter 5, Verse 6 (WOFIS, Iran).
Read ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s full commentary in Tafsir al-Mizan: 5:6–7 on almizan.org ↗
Al-Qurṭubī
Al-Qurṭubī begins by addressing the opening phrase, “when you rise for prayer.” Some understood it to mean every time one stands for prayer, thereby requiring ablution before each act of worship, while others held that it refers specifically to cases of ritual impurity. The majority incline toward the latter, though they acknowledge that some of the companions, out of devotion, would renew their ablution for each prayer as a meritorious act. From here he moves to the details of wuḍūʾ. Washing the face includes, in the opinion of many jurists, rinsing the mouth and nose. Washing the arms must reach and include the elbows. The wiping of the head is disputed: for some, wiping a part suffices, while others insist upon the whole. The feet are a locus of further discussion because of the variant Qurʾānic readings, some of which suggest washing while others allow wiping. The majority of jurists, however, regard washing as obligatory.
The conditions of ablution are also discussed. Most scholars emphasize that intention is a necessary element, and al-Qurṭubī explains that many also require the order of actions to be maintained and the washing to be performed without significant interruption. The nature of water itself is treated at length, with debates over the use of water left by humans or animals and the required qualities for it to remain valid for purification. Special cases are examined too: the rulings for one who is wounded or bandaged, for instance, permit wiping over coverings rather than washing beneath them.
Beyond wuḍūʾ, the verse also legislates for ghusl, or major purification. This is obligatory after sexual impurity, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding, and the command in the verse implies a full washing of the entire body. When water cannot be used due to illness or is altogether absent, tayammum is allowed, and al-Qurṭubī devotes significant analysis to what qualifies as “pure earth.” While most restrict it to dust or soil, others include sand or stone. He records the disagreements over whether one or two strikes are required, and whether the wiping is limited to the face and hands or extends further. Tayammum remains valid until water is found, at which point it ceases to be operative, and scholars debated whether prayers performed under tayammum must be repeated once water is later available.
For al-Qurṭubī, this verse demonstrates both the breadth of divine law and the mercy that underlies it. The instructions for ablution, bathing, and symbolic purification with earth illustrate a balance between legal precision and divine compassion. The law is not meant to burden, for God explicitly states in the verse that He does not wish to impose difficulty upon the believers, but rather to purify them and complete His favor upon them so that they may show gratitude. Thus, purification is more than a physical act of cleanliness; it is a spiritual discipline that prepares the worshipper to stand before his Lord, embodying both obedience and humility. The detailed disagreements among the jurists that al-Qurṭubī transmits reflect not confusion but the richness of Islamic jurisprudence, which has sought to preserve and interpret the divine command across diverse circumstances. Ultimately, he presents this verse as a comprehensive framework for understanding how ritual purity functions in Islam, not as a restriction, but as a manifestation of divine mercy and a sign of God’s desire to guide His servants along the path of worship and gratitude.
Source: Al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qur’ān (Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī), vol. 7, under Surah al-Māʾidah, Ayah 6, Pub. by Al-Risalah Foundation, Beirut.
Our reflection
This is our own reflection on the readings above. It is one way of reading the comparison, offered to encourage further thought rather than as the final word.
The three exegetes— Ibn Kathīr, al-Qurṭubī, and ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī—approach verse with a shared recognition of its importance as the foundation of ritual purification, yet their methods and emphases reveal strikingly different orientations.
Ibn Kathīr represents a narratively rich and tradition-heavy tafsīr. His commentary is dominated by reports from the Prophet and his Companions, preserving the practical details of wuḍūʾ as transmitted in hadith: rinsing the mouth and nose, washing limbs three times, wiping the whole head, and warning against leaving dry spots. He highlights concessions such as wiping over leather socks, treating them as mutawātir and thus beyond dispute, and emphasizes the Prophet’s encouragement of thoroughness and radiance for the Day of Judgment. Yet the strength of his approach—fidelity to transmitted reports—also exposes its weakness. When narrations appear to override the Qur’an’s plain wording, particularly concerning the “wiping” of the feet, Ibn Kathīr follows tradition rather than the text. His tafsīr thus safeguards Sunni legal practice but sometimes at the expense of linguistic precision.
Al-Qurṭubī, while also rooted in tradition, brings a more juristic and linguistic framework. His tafsīr is encyclopedic, cataloguing the disagreements of jurists: whether rinsing the mouth is obligatory, whether wiping the head must cover all or part, and whether the feet are to be washed or wiped. Unlike Ibn Kathīr, he foregrounds legal method—emphasizing intention, continuity, and the quality of water—making his tafsīr a resource for practical jurisprudence. Yet, despite preserving variant readings that support wiping the feet, he sides with the majority position that washing is obligatory, aligning law with prevailing Sunni consensus. The value of his tafsīr lies in its breadth, demonstrating the richness of fiqh debates, but its inclusivity comes at the cost of decisiveness: al-Qurṭubī transmits many views without always pressing their coherence with the Qur’an’s language.
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī, by contrast, offers a linguistically rigorous and theologically precise reading. For him, the Qur’an’s diction is primary: imsaḥū with bi- indicates partial wiping, and the coordination of “your feet” with the head keeps them within the wiping clause, not the washing one. Attempts to reinterpret the grammar to match juristic practice are, in his view, strained and unworthy of the Qur’an’s eloquence. He acknowledges Sunni traditions of washing the feet, but insists that if such a practice is to be defended, it must be justified through jurisprudential reasoning (e.g., abrogation) rather than by forcing the verse to mean something else. His commentary extends the verse’s rationale beyond technicalities: purification is not mere hygiene but a divinely designed discipline of spiritual readiness, law without hardship, and gratitude rooted in mercy. Unlike Ibn Kathīr and al-Qurṭubī, who lean on cumulative reports and juristic consensus, Ṭabāṭabāʾī insists on harmony between Qur’anic diction, linguistic evidence, and theological coherence.
Placed side by side, the three tafsīrs illustrate different strengths and shortcomings. Ibn Kathīr preserves the living practice of the early community but risks subordinating the text to narrations. Al-Qurṭubī organizes and transmits the juristic richness of Islamic law but refrains from challenging inherited consensus where it conflicts with textual precision. Ṭabāṭabāʾī offers the sharpest philological and theological coherence but, by privileging Qur’anic diction, critiques practices long embedded in the Sunni legal tradition. In this comparative light, verse becomes not only a guide to purification but a mirror of exegetical priorities: narration, jurisprudence, or linguistic-theological analysis.
What is your reflection?
How do you read this comparison? Do you see it differently, or have other ideas to add? We would like to hear from you.
Email your reflectionor write to info@tafsircompare.com