If one catches the imam in a position other than bowing, does he say the takbir only for the opening?

Question : But if he catches him in a position other than bowing. If he catches him in a position other than bowing, such as catching the imam while he is sitting, or catching him after rising from bowing, or catching him while he is prostrating. In this case, he says the takbir for the opening without any dispute. But does he say the takbir a second time if I leave the imam sitting and lower myself with him, or does he not say the takbir? Do we understand the scenario, yes or no? You arrived and the imam is sitting between the two prostrations or for the tashahhud, so you said the takbir for the opening while standing. Do you lower yourself with a takbir or without a takbir?

Answer : This is a point of disagreement among the scholars. Some said that you lower yourself without a takbir. A piece of firewood is not enough for him. Others said that you lower yourself with a takbir. Those who said that you lower yourself with a takbir said that this is like if you caught the bowing. Do you not, if you catch the bowing, say the takbir once for the opening and once for the bowing? If you catch him sitting, you say the takbir for the opening, then you say the takbir for the sitting. This is one opinion. The second opinion says: do not say the takbir, do not say the takbir, sit without a takbir. And in that case, it requires clarifying the difference between this and the one who caught what? The bowing. It says the difference is that your transition from standing to bowing is a transition in its proper place, because when does a person transition to bowing? From standing. So now you are standing, and if you want to leave it, you want to say the takbir. But your entering with the imam while he is sitting, if you said the takbir for the opening, is your transition from this standing to sitting a transition to the pillar that follows it, or to a pillar that does not follow it? To a pillar that does not follow it, it is known. They said: since this is a transition to a pillar that does not follow it, there is no takbir here. There is a takbir here because the takbir is only for the transition from a pillar to the pillar that follows it. And here the pillar does not follow it, so there is no takbir. And this is the well-known view among the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) that one lowers oneself without a takbir, because this pillar to which he lowered himself does not follow the pillar from which he transitioned, so the takbir is not prescribed in that case. But with this, we say: if a person says the takbir, there is no blame on him, and if he leaves it, there is no blame. And we leave the choice to the person, because there is no clear evidence to distinguish between bowing and other positions, between bowing and other positions. For it is possible for someone to say: yes, sitting does not follow standing, but what made me sit was following whom?
Following the imam. So I am now transitioning to a pillar to which I am commanded to transition, but following the imam, not by virtue of the original ruling. And this undoubtedly supports the opinion that he says the takbir. So what we see in this issue is that if he lowers himself with a takbir, he is not to be blamed, and if he does not say the takbir, there is no blame.