Hanafi school — Intention at the start of wudu is a Sunnah, not a condition of validity

In the Hanafi school, intention (niyyah) is one of the Sunnahs of wudu at its beginning; it is neither an obligation nor a condition of validity, because the meaning of devotional intent is not intrinsic to wudu in their view — hence wudu is valid even from a non-Muslim in their school, and rainwater running over the limbs suffices for wudu and ghusl without intention.

Evidence as quoted in the source (قرآن, Arabic text verbatim):

﴿يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ﴾ — قال الكاساني: أمر بالغسل والمسح مطلقًا عن شرط النية، ولا يجوز تقييد المطلق إلا بدليل.

Source: Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘ fi Tartib al-Shara’i‘, by ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Kasani, Book of Purification, chapter on the Sunnahs of wudu (vol. 1, p. 20 in the IslamWeb digital edition).

Shafi‘i school — Intention is a condition for the validity of wudu, with no disagreement among them

In the Shafi‘i school, intention is a condition for the validity of wudu, ghusl and tayammum, with no disagreement among them: whoever performs wudu without intending it has no valid wudu, "for every person shall have only what he intended." Al-Nawawi also cited the verse "And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion" (98:5), and al-Shafi‘i’s analogy of wudu to tayammum in requiring intention.

Evidence as quoted in the source (حديث, Arabic text verbatim):

«إنما الأعمال بالنيات، وإنما لكل امرئ ما نوى» — قال النووي في توجيهه: «وهذا لم ينوِ الوضوء فلا يكون له».

Source: Al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, by Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi, Book of Purification, chapter on the intention of purification (vol. 1, p. 355 in the IslamWeb digital edition). The passage consulted does not state a grading for the hadith, so none is added.

Maliki school — Intention is an obligation among the seven obligations of wudu

The obligations of wudu in the Maliki school are seven, as listed by al-Dardir: washing the face, washing the hands up to the elbows, wiping the whole head, and washing the feet — these four are agreed to be obligatory — plus intention, immediacy (fawr) and rubbing (dalk), these three being matters whose obligatoriness is disputed among the mujtahid heads of the schools.

Evidence as quoted in the source (Qur’an and Hadith, Arabic text verbatim):

قال الحطاب في مواهب الجليل: «وَالْمَذْهَبُ أَنَّهَا فَرْضٌ فِي الْوُضُوءِ، قَالَ ابْنُ رُشْدٍ فِي الْمُقَدِّمَاتِ وَابْنِ حَارِثٍ: اتِّفَاقًا، وَقَالَ الْمَازِرِيُّ: عَلَى الْأَشْهَرِ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ الْحَاجِبِ: عَلَى الْأَصَحِّ، قَالَ فِي التَّوْضِيحِ لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى {وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلا لِيَعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ} وَقَوْلِهِ - عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ - «إنَّمَا الْأَعْمَالُ بِالنِّيَّاتِ» خَرَّجَهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ وَمُسْلِمٌ»

Al-Hattab said in Mawahib al-Jalil: "The school’s position is that it is an obligation in wudu — Ibn Rushd in al-Muqaddimat and Ibn Harith said: by agreement; al-Maziri said: on the better-known view; and Ibn al-Hajib said: on the soundest view — as stated in al-Tawdih, because of His words: ‘And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion’ (98:5), and his words ﷺ: ‘Actions are only by intentions,’ narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim."

The place of the intention is the heart, and its time is at washing the face if one begins with it, as is the Sunnah — otherwise at the first obligation; it is the intention of removing impurity, or of the obligation, or of making permissible what was barred — as in al-Sharh al-Kabir with al-Dasuqi’s Hashiyah.

Internal difference within the school: Opposite the better-known and soundest views stands the narration of al-Walid ibn Muslim from Malik that the intention is not obligatory, as in Mawahib al-Jalil.

Source: Al-Sharh al-Kabir, by Ahmad al-Dardir, with the Hashiyah of al-Dasuqi, the obligations of wudu (vol. 1, p. 85 in the edition consulted; the detailed passages on intention at pp. 93–96 of the same edition); and Mawahib al-Jalil fi Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, by Shams al-Din al-Hattab (vol. 1, pp. 230–231 in the Shamela digital edition).

— Hanbali school

Intention is a condition for all purification from ritual impurity

Evidence: In the Hanbali school, intention is a condition for every purification from hadath — wudu, ghusl and tayammum alike — and it must precede the whole purification: anything of its obligations performed before the intention does not count. The intention is to aim at removing the impurity, or at purification for an act that is only permitted with it.

Internal difference within the school: Al-Mughni, by Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudamah, Book of Purification, chapter on placing the intention first; supported by the author’s own matn in al-Muqni‘: "Intention is a condition for all purification from hadath."

Source: Not stated in the passage consulted (the chapter on placing the intention first presupposes its conditionality); the chapter’s opening evidence in al-Mughni was not among the pages consulted, so the evidence is recorded as not stated, per the verbatim-from-source rule.

Hanafi school — The order of the limbs in wudu is a Sunnah, not an obligation

Keeping the revealed order of the limbs in wudu is, for the Hanafis, one of the Sunnahs of wudu, because the Prophet ﷺ kept to it consistently, and his consistent practice is the proof of its being a Sunnah.

Evidence: No specific text is quoted in the passage consulted; its proof there is the Prophet’s ﷺ consistent practice of the order.

Source: Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘, by al-Kasani, Book of Purification, chapter on the Sunnahs of wudu — as quoted verbatim in IslamWeb fatwa no. 159693, "The schools’ positions on the order of the obligations of wudu." This passage was opened directly in the Bada’i‘ (IslamWeb Library 12/64, page marker 22) and its wording collated against the fatwa’s quotation; it matches.

Maliki school — Ordering the obligations of wudu is a Sunnah, not an obligation

Ordering the obligations of wudu is, for the Malikis, one of its Sunnahs — washing the face before the hands, then wiping the head before the feet — because Allah turned from the two particles of sequence to the waw, which denotes mere conjunction. Whoever reverses the order and a long interval passes until the limbs dry repeats only the reversed limb if the separation was forgetful; if deliberate or out of ignorance, repeating the whole wudu is recommended for him.

Evidence as quoted in the source (أثر, Arabic text verbatim):

«لا أبالي إذا أتممت وضوئي بأيّ أعضائي بدأت» — منسوب في النص إلى عليّ رضي الله عنه موقوفًا بلفظ الخبر، ولم يصرّح الاقتباس برفعه ولا بدرجته.

Source: Sharh al-Kharashi ‘ala Mukhtasar Khalil, by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Kharashi, on Khalil’s words among the Sunnahs of wudu, "and ordering its obligations" — this passage was opened directly in Sharh al-Kharashi (vol. 1, p. 135, Maktabat al-Tarajim) and its wording collated against the quotation in IslamWeb fatwa no. 159693; it matches, and what the quotation had elided was supplied from the direct opening.

Shafi‘i school — The order is obligatory; deliberately leaving it invalidates wudu

The order of the limbs in wudu is obligatory for the Shafi‘is: if one leaves it deliberately, his wudu is invalid with no disagreement among them; if he forgets it, the well-known position is likewise the decisive invalidity of his wudu. The companions argued from the verse that Allah mentioned a wiped limb among washed ones, and separating a counterpart from its counterpart only occurs for a benefit — here, the obligatoriness of order — and from the Sunnah that everyone who described the Prophet’s ﷺ wudu described it in order, with no unordered description established.

Evidence: The evidence in the passage consulted is argumentative; al-Nawawi describes it (including "the sound, widely transmitted hadiths" describing the Prophet’s ﷺ wudu as ordered) without quoting one specific hadith verbatim, so no verbatim text is recorded.

Internal difference within the school: On forgetting the order there are two lines among the companions: the well-known one decisively invalidates the wudu; the second rests on two opinions — the later (jadid) invalidates it, the earlier (qadim) validates it.

Source: Al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, by al-Nawawi, Book of Purification, chapter on the description of wudu, section on order in wudu (vol. 1, p. 470 in the IslamWeb digital edition).

Hanbali school — The order in wudu is obligatory, as in the verse

The order in wudu is obligatory for the Hanbalis, as Allah stated in the verse. Ibn Qudamah said: "In sum: the order in wudu, as in the verse, is obligatory according to Ahmad; I have not seen any disagreement from him on it." In al-Muqni‘ the order is counted the sixth of the six obligations of wudu, and as to whether the obligatory here is also called a fard, the sound view among the companions is that it is so called.

Evidence: Not stated verbatim in the passages consulted; the position rests expressly on the order "as Allah mentioned in the verse."

Internal difference within the school: Abu al-Khattab transmitted another narration from Ahmad that the order is not obligatory; and on the order between rinsing the mouth and nose and the other limbs there are two narrations.

Source: Al-Mughni, by Ibn Qudamah, Book of Purification (the head of the issue was opened directly in al-Mughni — IslamWeb Library 15/151, issue 177 — and its wording collated against the quotation in IslamWeb fatwa no. 159693; it matches. Section 159 of al-Mughni itself was also opened directly and attests the obligatoriness of order in its sub-issue); and al-Muqni‘, by Ibn Qudamah: "Its obligations are six: … and its order as Allah the Exalted mentioned."

Hanafi school — Rinsing the mouth and nose are two Sunnahs in wudu

Rinsing the mouth (madmadah) and inhaling water into the nose (istinshaq) are, for the Hanafis, two Sunnahs in wudu, not obligations: what is obligatory in wudu is washing the three limbs and wiping the head, and the inside of the nose and mouth is not part of them; the Prophet’s ﷺ consistent practice of them in wudu is the proof of their being Sunnah rather than obligatory. Al-Kasani distinguished wudu from the chapter of major impurity, saying of the inside of the mouth and nose: "It need not be washed — unlike the chapter of major impurity (bab al-janabah), for what is obligatory there is purifying the body"; in ghusl, whatever can be washed, outward and inward, must be washed, per His words "then purify yourselves" (5:6).

Evidence: Not quoted verbatim in the passage consulted; its argument is reproduced in the position text.

Source: Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘, by al-Kasani — as quoted verbatim in IslamWeb fatwa no. 17079, "The scholars’ positions on rinsing the mouth and nose in wudu and ghusl." The passage was opened directly in Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘ (IslamWeb library, book 12, chapter on the Sunnahs of wudu) and collated against the quotation in fatwa no. 17079; the original wording "bab al-janabah" (the chapter of major impurity) is adopted.

Maliki school — Rinsing the mouth and nose are two of the eight Sunnahs of wudu

Rinsing the mouth and inhaling water are, for the Malikis, two of the Sunnahs of wudu: rinsing is the second Sunnah — putting water into the mouth, swirling it and expelling it — and inhaling is the third — drawing water by breath into the nose; if water enters the nose without being drawn in, the Sunnah has not been performed.

Evidence: Not stated in the passage consulted, which is definitional and enumerative, from the chapter on the Sunnahs.

Source: Al-Sharh al-Kabir, by al-Dardir, with the Hashiyah of al-Dasuqi, the Sunnahs of wudu (vol. 1, p. 98 in the IslamWeb digital edition). Supported from the school’s books by al-Baji’s al-Muntaqa — this passage was opened directly in al-Muntaqa (al-Maktaba al-Shamila, vol. 1, p. 96) and its wording collated against the quotation in fatwa no. 17079; it matches: "The proof of the soundness of what Malik and those who agree with him held is that this is a purification pertaining to the body, so conveying water inside the mouth and nose is not obligatory in it without impurity — like washing the dead."

Shafi‘i school — Rinsing the mouth and nose are two Sunnahs in wudu and ghusl

Rinsing the mouth and inhaling water are, for the Shafi‘is, two Sunnahs in both wudu and ghusl — "the position of Malik and al-Shafi‘i and their companions," as al-Nawawi stated expressly; and he said in al-Majmu‘: "They are two Sunnahs in wudu and ghusl; this is our school."

Evidence: Not stated in the passages consulted.

Source: Al-Nawawi’s commentary on Sahih Muslim, Book of Purification, chapter on the description and perfection of wudu (vol. 3, p. 461 in the IslamWeb digital edition) — opened directly, containing the author’s express statement of his own school. The parallel quotation from al-Majmu‘ was verified by opening the passage directly in al-Majmu‘ itself (IslamWeb Library 14/436, around page markers 399 and 400); its wording matches.

Hanbali school — Rinsing the mouth and nose are obligatory in wudu and ghusl

Rinsing the mouth and inhaling water are, for the Hanbalis, obligatory in both purifications, wudu and ghusl, because they are part of the face; the sound view among the companions is that with their obligatoriness they are also called a fard. Inhaling is more emphasised than rinsing, because of the sound reports concerning it specifically. Al-Bahuti added in Kashshaf al-Qina‘ that continuity and order between them and the remaining limbs are obligatory, since they belong to the face (the Kashshaf text was opened directly in Kashshaf al-Qina‘ — IslamWeb Library, book 16, page marker 94 — and its wording collated and found to match exactly; the ruling itself rests on al-Muqni‘ and al-Mughni, opened directly).

Evidence: Not stated verbatim in the passages consulted; the reports on inhaling are referred to by al-Mughni as "sound reports concerning it specifically," without a grading stated in the passage.

Internal difference within the school: It is narrated from Ahmad that inhaling alone is obligatory in both, and that both are obligatory in the greater purification (ghusl) but not the lesser (wudu); and on calling them fard along with their obligatoriness there are two narrations, the sound one being that they are so called.

Source: Al-Muqni‘ and al-Mughni, by Ibn Qudamah (al-Muqni‘: "Then he rinses and inhales three times… and they are obligatory in both purifications"; al-Mughni, section 159, on calling them fard and on the greater emphasis of inhaling) — opened directly; and Kashshaf al-Qina‘, by al-Bahuti, chapter on wudu (p. 94 in the digital edition).

Hanafi school — The obligatory amount of wiping the head is measured: three fingers, a quarter, or the forelock

The obligatory amount of the head to be wiped is, for the Hanafis, measured — with internal variation in the measure: it was stated in al-Asl and measured as three fingers of the hand; al-Hasan narrated from Abu Hanifah that he measured it as a quarter, which is also Zufar’s position; and al-Karkhi and al-Tahawi reported from the companions the measure of the forelock (nasiyah). The basis for the three-fingers measure is that the instrument of wiping is the fingers of the hand, three fingers are the majority of the fingers, and the majority carries the ruling of the whole; and the basis for the forelock measure is that the Prophet’s ﷺ act of wiping over his forelock is a clarification of the Book’s unelaborated command. Al-Kasani does not, in the passage consulted, expressly prefer one narration, so they are presented as he presented them.

Evidence as quoted in the source (حديث, Arabic text verbatim):

روى المغيرة بن شعبة «أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بالَ وتوضأ ومسح على ناصيته» — قال الكاساني: فصار فعله عليه الصلاة والسلام بيانًا لمجمل الكتاب. ولم يذكر الموضع المجلوب درجة الحديث.

Internal difference within the school: Three narrations/positions: three fingers of the hand (the narration of al-Asl); a quarter (al-Hasan’s narration from Abu Hanifah, and Zufar’s position); and the measure of the forelock (reported by al-Karkhi and al-Tahawi from the companions).

Source: Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘, by al-Kasani, Book of Purification, exposition of the pillars of wudu, section on wiping the head (vol. 1, p. 5 in the IslamWeb digital edition). The passage does not state a grading for the hadith of al-Mughirah.

Shafi‘i school — The obligatory wiping of the head is whatever the name "wiping" applies to, however little

The well-known position of the Shafi‘i school, supported by al-Shafi‘i’s texts and decisively held by the majority of the companions, is that the obligation of wiping the head has no fixed measure: whatever the name "wiping" applies to suffices, however little — even wiping part of a single hair discharges it. The companions argued that it is established in the Sahih that the Prophet ﷺ wiped over his forelock, and the forelock is less than a quarter, so neither full coverage nor a fixed measure can be obligatory; and they said the ba’ in the verse is for partition (tab‘id).

Evidence: No hadith is quoted verbatim in the passage consulted; al-Nawawi refers to the wiping-over-the-forelock report as "established in the Sahih" — recorded here in his own words, not converted into a grading.

Internal difference within the school: Ibn al-Qass and Abu al-Hasan ibn Khayran said its minimum is wiping three hairs; al-Baghawi said nothing less than the measure of the forelock should suffice, as was also reported from al-Muzani; and the companions agreed on the weakness of Ibn al-Qass’s position (as al-Nawawi reports in the same source).

Source: Al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, by al-Nawawi, Book of Purification, chapter on the description of wudu, the obligatory part of wiping the head (vol. 1, p. 431 in the IslamWeb digital edition).

Maliki school — Wiping the whole head is obligatory

Wiping the entire head is, for the Malikis, one of the four agreed obligations within al-Dardir’s enumeration of the seven obligations of wudu; the obligation is to cover the whole head with the wipe. The boundary of the head for them runs from the usual hairline to the hollow of the nape, including wiping the hair that hangs down, however long, by regard to its root, and braiding need not be undone, for man or woman — as in al-Sharh al-Kabir with al-Dasuqi’s Hashiyah.

Evidence as quoted in the source (Arabic text verbatim):

قال الحطاب في مواهب الجليل: «وَالْمَشْهُورُ مِنْ الْمَذْهَبِ أَنَّ مَسْحَ جَمِيعِهِ وَاجِبٌ فَإِنْ تُرِكَ بَعْضُهُ لَمْ يُجْزِهِ... ظَاهِرُ كَلَامِ الشَّيْخِ أَنَّهُ إنْ تَرَكَ بَعْضَهُ وَإِنْ قَلَّ لَا يُجْزِئُهُ وَهُوَ كَذَلِكَ عِنْدَ مَالِكٍ»

Al-Hattab said in Mawahib al-Jalil: "The well-known position of the school is that wiping all of it is obligatory; if part of it is left, it does not suffice for him… The apparent sense of the Shaykh’s words is that if he leaves part of it, however little, it does not suffice — and that is so with Malik." He also gave the school’s basis: what Malik stated in al-‘Utbiyyah when asked about one who wiped his head without covering it all — "He repeats it" — and by analogy with wiping the face in tayammum, and because acting on this is established from the Prophet ﷺ.

Internal difference within the school: Ibn Maslamah said two-thirds suffice; Abu al-Faraj said a third; and Ashhab said the forelock suffices — as in Mawahib al-Jalil — while the well-known position is the obligation of the whole.

Source: Al-Sharh al-Kabir, by al-Dardir, with the Hashiyah of al-Dasuqi, the obligations of wudu (vol. 1, p. 85 in the edition consulted; the passage on the head’s boundaries and branches at pp. 88–89 of the same edition); and Mawahib al-Jalil fi Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, by al-Hattab (vol. 1, pp. 202–203 in the Shamela digital edition).

Hanbali school — The whole exterior of the head must be wiped; the ba’ is for adhesion

The obligation for the Hanbalis is to wipe the entire exterior of the head, from the usual hairline to the nape: because Allah commanded wiping the head just as He commanded wiping the face in tayammum, where full coverage is obligatory, and so it is here; the ba’ in the verse is for adhesion (ilsaq), not partition; and the Prophet’s ﷺ act of wiping all of it is a clarification of the verse. The apparent position from Ahmad is that full coverage is obligatory for a man, and that for a woman wiping the front of her head suffices, as al-Muwaffaq (Ibn Qudamah) stated.

Evidence: Not stated verbatim in the passage consulted for the measure of the obligation; the hadith of ‘Abd Allah ibn Zayd on the manner of wiping appears in the source under the recommended manner, not under the obligatory measure, so it is not presented as the evidence of obligation.

Internal difference within the school: Some companions of the school (the author of al-Mubhij and al-Mutarjim) excused leaving a small part for hardship, and al-Insaf called this the sound view; and from Ahmad concerning a woman, that wiping the front of her head suffices for her, as al-Muwaffaq transmitted.

Source: Kashshaf al-Qina‘ ‘an Matn al-Iqna‘, by Mansur ibn Yunus al-Bahuti, Book of Purification, chapter on wudu, section "He wipes the whole exterior of his head" (vol. 1, p. 99 in the IslamWeb digital edition).