This report, then, serves as proof for those who oblige including the elbows in the washing. For when a word is equally open to two meanings, one may adopt neither of them without supporting evidence. Admittedly, the preposition ilā in Arabic is more commonly used to mark a limit than to mean “together with,” and the noun yad is more plainly applied to what lies below the upper arm than to what lies above it. From a purely linguistic standpoint the view of those who exclude the elbows is therefore stronger; yet the position of those who include them is clearer in light of this tradition—unless, that is, the tradition is taken as merely recommending the practice. As you can see, the matter admits both possibilities.

Some have further stated that when the endpoint (ghāyah) is of the same genus as the thing delimited, it is deemed included, but if it is not of the same genus it is deemed excluded.

Sixth Issue under Delimitation
The scholars unanimously agree that wiping the head is among the obligations of wuḍūʾ, but they differed over the amount that suffices. Mālik held that wiping the entire head is compulsory. Al-Shāfiʿī, several of Mālik’s own companions, and Abū Ḥanīfah maintained that wiping part of it fulfils the duty. Some Mālikīs fixed that “part” at one-third of the head, others at two-thirds. Abū Ḥanīfah set it at one-quarter and, in addition, stipulated a minimum portion of the hand, saying: “If he wipes with fewer than three fingers, it does not suffice.” Al-Shāfiʿī laid down no quantitative limit—neither for the part of the hand that wipes nor for the portion of the head wiped.

The root of this disagreement is the multiple functions of the preposition bi- in Arabic. At times it is an “extra” particle, as in the verse, “a tree that produces oil” (Qur’an 23:20) according to the reading that vocalises tunbitu with ḍamma on the tāʾ and kasra on the bāʾ (from anbata). At other times it conveys a partitive sense, as when one says, “I took hold of him by his cloak and by his upper arm.” Denying this partitive usage makes little sense in Arabic; it is, in fact, the view of the Kufan grammarians.

Whoever regards the bi- here as an extra, purely emphatic particle obliges wiping the whole head; whoever sees it as partitive obliges wiping only a portion. Those favouring this latter view cite the ḥadīth of al-Mughīrah, in which “the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—performed ablution and wiped over his forelock and over the turban,” a report recorded by Muslim.

Even if we concede that the bi- is superfluous, another question remains: are we required to take the initial parts of the named objects or their final parts?

Seventh Issue—Number of Repetitions
The scholars concur that, provided the washing is thorough, the obligatory purification of the limbs that must be washed is to wash each of them once. Washing twice or thrice is recommended, because it is soundly reported that “the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—performed ablution once once, performed ablution twice twice, and performed ablution three times three times,” and because a simple command entails only a single performance—that is, the command