Let us suppose that the imam was a Hanafi who holds that the recommended practice is to raise the hands at the first takbir; should I follow him in omitting the transitional takbirs?

Al-Hawini: But, our Shaykh, a difficulty arises here: let us suppose that the imam was a Hanafi who holds that it is part of the recommended practice to raise the hands at the first takbir; should I follow him in omitting the transitional takbirs?

The Shaykh : I will answer you regarding this with my previous words, but have we finished with the previous or earlier discussion?
Al-Huwaini: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes?
Al-Huwaini: Yes.

The Shaykh : Do you have any observation or anything else so that we may benefit from it?
Al-Hawini: Glory be to Allah.

The Shaykh : And praise be to Allah.
Al-Hawini: Perhaps I am coming to benefit, I mean.

The Shaykh : And you came, likewise, not to be good at benefiting others?
Al-Hawini: If I have something, I mean.

The Shaykh : That is what we are asking about.
Yes, it is necessary to follow the Hanafi imam who does not raise his hands, and extend this ruling to similar cases, except in the case of one who is ignorant; that is, one who is neither a mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings) nor a follower of a scholar, nor one who follows a respected imam, especially if he contradicts his own school of jurisprudence. For example, the clearest case in your previous example is: a Hanafi who does not raise his hands, a Shafi'i who does not raise his hands, but this one is negligent; he is not to be followed because he contradicts the Sunnah in his own school of jurisprudence. As for the Hanafi, he believes that this is the Sunnah, and it does not concern us to be precise about whether this Hanafi who does not raise his hands contradicted the Sunnah or not; because we are commanded to follow the imam whether he is correct or incorrect. But in one case—as you gave as an example—regarding the Shafi'i imam who neglects the Sunnah and does not follow it, we do not follow him, unlike the Hanafi imam; because you can imagine that you are praying behind, for example, Ibn Mas'ud; he prays and does not raise his hands except with the takbir of intention. So what do we say in this situation? What is less than this is measured by it. So if this ideal case is accepted, that is, in the case of following Ibn Mas'ud, for example, if this is accepted, then what follows it is accepted; otherwise, it is not. Therefore, the discussion should be directed toward such a case: if we prayed behind Ibn Mas'ud, what would we do?
Al-Hawini: I mean, it appears that we should say, for example, we suppose Abdullah ibn Mas'ud.

The Shaykh : The questions are at your expense, so give it your attention.
Al-Hawini: No, our Shaykh, this is the last day, I mean, and the last one, so I hope you will forgive us, I mean.

The Shaykh : Pardon me.
Al-Hawini: I mean, for example, if we suppose that Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) is praying behind Ibn Mas'ud, and Abdullah ibn Umar holds that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) says the transitional takbir, and Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) raises his hands only at the takbir of intention.

The Shaykh : We supposed that you are Ibn Umar; what do you do?
Al-Hawini: I mean, I do as I saw the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) do.

The Shaykh : And what do you do with his saying?
Al-Hawini: When he was made the imam?

The Shaykh : Yes.
Al-Hawini: I mean, here, I mean, a question arises.

The Shaykh: Of course.
Al-Huwaini: And it is the issue of extending what is not mentioned in the text to the text; that is, that is, for example, this is a general term; can I include what was omitted in the text, what the Lawgiver did not mention in the text, by way of analogical reasoning or the like?

The Shaykh : No, it is not by way of analogical reasoning.
Al-Hawini: Rather, it is by way of attachment?

The Shaykh : Nor is it by way of attachment, but rather by way of applying the general text to its generality.
Al-Hawini: I mean, for example, if he let his hands hang down in prayer and did not take them without...

The Shaykh : As you wish, dozens of examples, stay in your place; what is the difference between this and that? Either you suppose affirmation or you suppose negation, the result is the same.
Al-Hawini: Can we suppose affirmation or negation as long as it does not contradict the Sunnah?

The Shaykh : I told you just now, and you returned to benefit from the discussion; have we finished with the discussion? That the hadith: Did it restrict following to these issues, or is it permissible, in your expression, to attach, and in my expression, to apply the general text? We have not reached anything, but you returned to what you started with.
Al-Hawini: Am I evading??
" The Shaykh : They both laugh.

The Shaykh : In any case, reminding is beneficial, if Allah wills, for one who does not intend to evade. What has become clear to you in his saying: Do you understand that these commands mentioned in this hadith after the generalization are a specification of the text, so that your previous question arises about attaching, measuring, and so on, or what do you understand from the hadith?
Al-Hawini: It is understood from the hadith complete following.

The Shaykh : Good, in that case, the examples that were raised; is it not part of complete following that we do as the imam does?
Al-Hawini: I mean, for example, let us suppose that the imam, for example, was wearing pants; I mean, do I follow him in this?
" The Shaykh : They both laugh.

The Shaykh : This is not part of the prayer, may Allah forgive you!
Al-Hawini: I mean, I read for Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah: a man said, if the imam does not sit for the rest, does the ma'mum (one praying behind the imam) sit? He said: Yes, he sits for as long as he does not lag behind the imam. It appears here that the man, or what appears from him, is that the Sunnah is otherwise regarding the issue of following the imam. Is it a condition that I know that this man is one who reads and understands and the like, and has not been negligent?

The Shaykh : I mentioned to you that this imam is either a mujtahid, a follower, or one who follows a mujtahid. If he is a frivolous person, I told you just now about the Shafi'i who does not raise his hands... from the Sunnah; this one is not to be followed. But if he is a mujtahid, that is why I advise you and those like you to research the issue from its origin and root; because understanding what follows from it becomes easier after that. So now you have jumped from the topic of praying behind Ibn Mas'ud, for example. Ibn Mas'ud is a mujtahid imam, a noble Companion who saw the Messenger and saw Ibn Umar, and so on. So if we pray behind Ibn Mas'ud, for example, or behind one who adopted the opinion of Ibn Mas'ud like Abu Hanifa, or behind one who followed Abu Hanifa, or behind one who followed Abu Hanifa without knowing his evidence; the examples are the same in terms of what concerns our research, but there is a difference, of course, between the mujtahid, the follower, and the one who follows without knowing his evidence. And so, as they say in our region in the Levant: "I hit it with a 'Alawiyyah," I connected it to Ibn Mas'ud the mujtahid imam, to, to, and so on. So what does a person imagine, does he contradict him or follow him within the limits of this hadith? But you keep returning to say Ibn Umar, you say Ibn Taymiyyah. No, we are not researching individuals now. Ibn Taymiyyah may hold an opinion that you do not hold and that I hold, or Ibn Taymiyyah may hold an opinion that you hold and that I do not hold; and yet, by your claim against me or my claim against you; because these opinions are widespread among everyone, and every person acts according to what seems to him. We are now in the process of understanding this hadith; what does this hadith give us? And I drew your attention to his saying (peace be upon him): It dropped the pillar from the one who is able to stand, the one following behind that imam. It dropped the pillar, the pillar being standing, where the prayer is not valid for the one who is able to stand if he prays standing in the obligatory prayer. Knowing that it is known to you, I mean, why did it drop this pillar? Only to achieve the current, clear, formal similarity between the sitting imam and the standing follower? Especially if you remember with me the reason for which he (peace be upon him) said this hadith, which is when he prayed the midday prayer with his Companions, and he was injured in his ankle, so he led the people in prayer while sitting, and they prayed behind him standing; so he gestured to them to sit, and after he finished the prayer he said: to the end of the hadith. So this imam is excused and prays from a sitting position; so what dropped this pillar from the followers to achieve the following that he established at the beginning of the hadith: ; do you think if he left a recommended practice while excused, we contradict him? Here is the question.
Al-Huwayni: Yes.

The Shaykh : Here is the question: if he left a recommended practice while excused, do we contradict him or follow him?
Al-Hawini: It appears that we follow him, but Al-Hafiz al-Hazimi, our Shaykh, I read "Al-I'tibar," I mean, he says the same thing about sitting with the sitting imam.

The Shaykh : This is another issue we will study, if Allah wills, at your expense as well. But if the hadith is clear and decisive, what does it indicate?
Al-Huwaini: The hadith indicates following the first hadith.

The Shaykh : Yes, it indicates following. In that case, our first sub-issue is that the follower does not sit down if the imam sits down, correct?
Al-Huwayni: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good; so the issue requires research to determine whether this hadith is clear and decisive or abrogated, correct?
Al-Huwayni: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good; Al-Hazmi says that it is abrogated. Good; what do we say or do if we say that Ibn Taymiyyah says that the hadith is not abrogated?
Al-Huwaini: A difference of opinion.

The Shaykh : What do we do? What do we do in that case?
Al-Huwaini: We prefer one view, meaning we look to see if this claim of abrogation is established or not.

The Shaykh : Good, you must have seen it, or what did you see? Is this claim established or not? I will not burden you; either it is established or it is not. If the claim is not established, we are relieved of it and return to what we agreed upon. The truth is that the claim is established; our claim is established, and Al-Hazmi's claim is not established. Then, to shorten the research, or is the research long in terms of proving that our claim is established and his is not? But we approach the matter from another path: if the end of the hadith is established, does it necessitate that its beginning is established?
Al-Huwayni: No.

The Shaykh : So we continue to hold onto , even if we assume that that branch was abrogated; that is, ; if we concede for the sake of argument that it was abrogated, we still hold onto an important principle: . The truth is, and may Allah have mercy on you, that this issue is one of the important issues from which many branches have derived. Many people mistakenly assume that the detail mentioned after the generalization is a specification, and this is an error; because specification in the science of principles is when a specific text contradicts the general text, and therefore it is applied to the general text to specify it and exclude it from it. It is not so when the specific text conforms to the general text; this becomes part of the parts of the general text. I think you must have read this expression in a book by Al-Shawkani, for example. So here he said: and so on. This is not a specification of the general text, but this branching is branching based on the general text; so it is not correct in any way to say that this is a specification, so nothing else is attached to it. It is not said that if we attach these mentioned things to it, it is not attachment by way of analogy or reasoning, but it is attachment to the general text. Good; so this hadith in its generality is established in other specific applications; for example, we give an example: if the imam forgets the first tashahhud and stands up for the third rak'ah, what do we do? Do we follow him?

Another questioner : We follow him.

The Shaykh : And he is mistaken?
Al-Huwaini: We follow him.

The Shaykh : And he is mistaken?
Al-Huwaini: It appears that we follow him, although here there is a saying... and I said: Glory be to Allah!

The Shaykh : No, there is no saying.

Another questioner : There is no saying.

The Shaykh: No.
Al-Huwaini: I read it.

The Shaykh : What did you read, and where is this?
Al-Huwaini: Do we follow?

The Shaykh : No, the issue you are talking about, I specified it; I said: the imam made a mistake and stood up; after he stands up, he cannot return.
Al-Huwayni: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good, so we are certain that he made a mistake. As for the situation you are referring to, that he says: Glory be to Allah, he stands up from the second prostration to the third rak'ah instead of doing the tashahhud, it is said to him: Glory be to Allah. But if all the people were unaware and did not realize until the imam had fully stood up, they should not say: Glory be to Allah; because this would mislead him at that time, especially if he is an imam of the imams of the last times, who does not know the rulings related to prayer. He might notice the mistake or return; so this is not permissible.

Another questioner : Is the prayer invalid, my Shaykh?

The Shaykh : No, the prayer is not invalid as some say. No, the important thing is that he does not return. My intention with this example is that we are certain of his mistake; so what is our position regarding it? We follow him despite our objections. Good; this is an example agreed upon that if the imam makes a mistake with certainty, we must follow him. So this example was not mentioned in the hadith: and so on. And if he forgets and forgets the tashahhud and stands up for the third rak'ah... no, he did not say anything of this. He is not, as you know, it is not the function of the explainer, and he is the Messenger (peace be upon him), to exhaust the branches; because the branches do not... have this, as you know. But he establishes a principle, either he clarifies it sometimes with some examples, or it does not need clarification, so it remains an absolute principle, and people understand it. From this perspective, it is established that Ibn Mas'ud used to rebuke Uthman for completing the prayer in Mina, and yet he used to pray four rak'ahs. He was asked: How is this? You say this is contrary to the Sunnah and then you follow him? He said: "Disagreement is evil." This phrase is the crux of the wisdom of this matter; . So the imam is not contradicted, even if we are certain of his mistake. The important thing is that he is not certain of the mistake or intentional in his mistake. If he is excused, we follow him.
This is what ... .