What is the ruling on the imam returning to the first tashahhud after standing up?

The questioner : I prayed in one of the mosques, and it happened that the imam forgot the sitting for the first tashahhud and stood up straight. The people behind him began to recite tasbih, so the imam returned and sat for the tashahhud, then stood up and completed the prayer correctly. After we finished the prayer, a man stood up and said, "O people, your prayer is invalid, because the imam returned from a pillar to a recommended practice, then he established the prayer and repeated it." What is the stronger opinion in this case?

Another questioner : We said, "One" when the people said the takbir.

The Shaykh : They say, "Allah." Indeed, compounded ignorance is worse than simple ignorance. Compounded ignorance is when a person does not know, and does not know that he does not know, and that is the calamity. A person issues a fatwa on a matter about which he has no knowledge, not from the Book of Allah, nor from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), nor from the statement of a scholar from whom he took it with certainty. He issues a fatwa based on something else. That is, he misguides and eats [illicitly]. He misguides himself and misguides others. Until... until... I say, I want... this... the one who issued the fatwa that the prayer is invalid and must be repeated has no evidence for that.
And in this case, if the imam stands up from the first tashahhud until he is fully standing, it is forbidden for him to sit down. Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)... I... stood up from the first tashahhud one day. I... so they recited tasbih for him, and he proceeded and did not return. When he finished the prayer and the people waited for his taslim, he prostrated. And two prostrations, then one prostration. Ah. This is what is obligatory. If he stands up.
If the imam stands up from the first tashahhud until he is fully standing, then his return is forbidden and not permissible. But if he hopes... completion. As for this imam for whom they recited tasbih, he hoped... Italy. He was a scholar that his bowing was forbidden. Then the prayer... and his feeling is invalid. Until... and even if he did not know that the prayer is invalidated by that. No, no. As long as he knew that his prayer is invalid. That we hope... and if his prayer is forbidden, then his prayer is... If he did not know that his return is forbidden, and thought that it is obligatory for him, and that a person, if he is reminded of the first tashahhud after standing, must return, and he returned thinking that this is obligatory, then his prayer is not invalidated, and his prayer is valid, and all he has to do is prostrate for forgetfulness after the taslim for the addition he added, which is the standing. Come. Come. This is the ruling of this issue. And with this... by the way, and it is our saying. That a person, if he knows the forbidden... the regular [prayer] in the city. By its ruling, even if he does not know its punishment. Ah. On this occasion, I say. Allah. I asked you... once. About a man who had intercourse with his wife during the day of Ramadan. And he enters. You know it is forbidden. Once. But he did not know that he is required to pay an expiation for that. I. Fasting, freeing a slave, if he does not find one, then fasting two consecutive months, if he cannot do that, then feeding sixty poor people. As for the saying of Allah. Do we say this man is not required to do anything? Because. He is ignorant, and Allah the Exalted said: . Or. Do we say that this man is bound by the expiation because he intentionally committed the sin, and whether he is bound by an expiation or not is a matter for Allah and His Messenger, not for him. He is bound to obey and not to transgress. He dared to commit the forbidden, so if he dared to commit it, he is weighed by what follows from it, whether he knew it or did not know it.
And on this basis, we say that the one who had intercourse with his wife during the day of Ramadan, and he knows that it is forbidden, is required to pay an expiation, even if he did not know the obligation of the expiation, because he dared to commit the sin with knowledge, so he is not excused. Yes. The opposite of that is if a man commits zina and is forgiven for his wife. Hmm. If a man commits zina with a woman and he is muhsan. That is, he thought. He married and had intercourse with his wife and became muhsan, then he is required to be stoned with stones until he dies, Papa. He is slaughtered with the sword, he is stood before the people, and small stones like a date or similar are brought, and he is stoned with these stones until he dies, on the door of the Tamri patience on. This fornicator, for example, if he said. I. He knows that zina is decreed. Yes. But he did not know that its punishment is stoning. If he knew that its punishment is stoning, he would not have committed zina. We say this is not an excuse, so the hadd is carried out on you, because you committed the sin, and you did not fear Allah the Mighty and Majestic, and what follows from your action is a matter for Allah, and it is not a condition that you know the punishment; the important thing is that you know the ruling, so if you proceed with the thing while knowing its ruling, you are bound by what it entails.