On following the imam in prayer.

The Shaykh: Does the one who is in prostration follow his imam on two knees, or does he differ from his imam and apply this obligatory thing? And we ask for clarification on how to follow the imam?
This is a matter we have spoken about for a long time, and it relates to a principle and to branches that branched off from that principle. The principle is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): - or - . This hadith is in "the two Sahihs" with the narration of a group of the Companions, among them Abu Hurayrah, among them Aishah, among them Anas ibn Malik, and some of them add to what the others said.
The point is: that in this hadith there is the command of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to the worshippers to follow the imam, and it came at the end of this hadith, as you heard: . This hadith establishes for us this principle, which is the obligation of following the imam; even if he prays sitting; that is: while he is unable to stand, we must follow him in prayer sitting; that is: we drop the pillar which is standing in order to achieve the following and the complete example of this imam. This is the principle in the subject of the question that came earlier.
As for the matters that confirm this general text ; for example, in the Sunan from the hadith of al-Mughirah ibn Shu'bah that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) led one day, and when he intended to sit for the tashahhud he forgot and stood up for the third rak'ah, so his Companions made tasbih for him, but he did not return for the tashahhud and continued the prayer, then he prostrated the two prostrations of forgetfulness. This same incident happened to the narrator of the hadith, who is al-Mughirah ibn Shu'bah; where he also forgot in his turn the first tashahhud, and that was in the Maghrib prayer, so those behind him made tasbih for him, but he did not turn to them, and at the end of the prayer he prostrated two prostrations and said: "I prayed behind the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and he forgot the tashahhud, so they made tasbih for him, so he did as we did." He said: And he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . This is the meaning of the hadith of al-Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, so we find here that this hadith obligates the followers who became aware of the imam's error to follow him in his error, and he has left an obligatory thing from the obligations of the prayer; which is the tashahhud sitting and reciting. Indeed, there is in "Sahih al-Bukhari" that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed with his Companions one day the Zuhr prayer five rak'ahs without making the tashahhud in the fourth rak'ah, and he only made the tashahhud in the fifth rak'ah, and when he said the taslim (peace and blessings be upon him), it was said to him: "O Messenger of Allah, was there an addition in the prayer?" He said: . They said to him: "You have prayed five?" So the Messenger (peace be upon him) prostrated the two prostrations of forgetfulness, then he said: . So we find in this incident that the Companions followed the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) until when he stood for the fifth rak'ah of the Zuhr prayer.
And it is said on this occasion that the following of the Companions of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was only because of their assumption that it was possible that a new ruling had come down upon the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), and that is why he prayed five. And based on this assumption - as it was said - they said to him: "Was there an addition in the prayer?" And he answered them in the negative, and prostrated two prostrations, and excused himself by saying that he was forgetful. Thus some say that the following of the Companions of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was only because it stood in their minds that it was possible that a new ruling had come, meaning that if they had been certain that there was no possibility of adding to the four of Zuhr, they would not have followed him. So we respond to these people from two angles:
The first angle: that this is a mere claim, there is no evidence for what they went to.
And the second thing - which is stronger - : that the Companions and many of the Tabi'un had an incident that was much stranger than this incident, and yet they did not see it permissible for themselves to differ from the imam. It also came in "Sahih al-Bukhari" that one of the governors in the time of the Umayyads prayed with the people the Fajr prayer four rak'ahs, and he was as if he was still affected by a drink he had drunk, and after he said the taslim with them he turned to them saying: "Shall I add to you?" If four is not enough for you instead of two rak'ahs, I am ready to add, shall I add to you? So we do not find in this incident, despite its anomaly and strangeness and addition, that any of the Companions and Tabi'un said: "This prayer is invalid," and the reason is their consideration of the principle: .
What confirms this to you is what Imam Abu Dawud narrated in his "Sunan" with his authentic chain that Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) used to follow Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) when he prayed behind him in Mina, and Uthman used to pray four rak'ahs while traveling like the other Companions; because that was in the season of Hajj and he was in Mina during the days of Mina, the days of Tashriq, so he used to pray with the people in full without shortening, so Ibn Mas'ud used to disapprove of that for him, and remind him of what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was doing in the Farewell Pilgrimage and in all his travels, that he continued to shorten until he returned to Madinah.
The Companions of Ibn Mas'ud used to hear from him this disapproval of Uthman, then they would see him on the other hand praying behind him four rak'ahs, so they would say to him: "How is this? You disapprove of the completion for him and then you follow him?" His answer was: "Disagreement is evil." As if Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) is saying: We are between two evils, the first evil is differing from the Sunnah in shortening; so the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) used to shorten always and forever, so differing from this Sunnah is without doubt an evil, but there is another evil; differing from the imam whom we follow, this is an evil. And as if he is saying - as I understand - the Messenger says: , and in another hadith he adds and says: , do not differ from him, do as he does. So Ibn Mas'ud says: So we are between two evils; so I choose the lighter of the two evils, and the lighter of them is that I do not differ from the imam. So if I pray with the people as an imam, I shorten, but if I pray with an imam who does not shorten but completes, then differing from him is an evil. So this indicates to us that Ibn Mas'ud, and the like of this was also narrated from some of the other Companions like Abu al-Darda and Abu Dharr - I am uncertain now - also used to pray behind Uthman in full, and answers with the same answer: "Disagreement is evil."
So from this group of texts I have become convinced that the follower, if he follows an imam and is pleased with him as an example for him, should let his personality disappear behind the personality of this imam, and that his prayer should become the prayer of the imam; whether he is right or wrong; because being right and being wrong in such matters are matters of ijtihad, and every person naturally claims that the Sunnah is with him. And therefore the Sunnah, from such evidence as the previous, unites the Muslims in their prayer, and gathers them behind this one imam, and makes their prayer one with no disagreement among them in it. That is because disagreement in one act of worship is more impactful than widespread general disagreement. If Allah (Mighty and Majestic) warns generally against disagreement and says: then disagreement in the same act of worship itself is more dangerous for those who disagree. Let no one say - as we have heard repeatedly: "How do we leave the Sunnah, for example we leave placing the hands on the chest" ?! And like what came in the question: "He is prostrating on his knees, we follow him" ?! Let no one say this; because we do not say follow the imam in what we believe to be an error or contrary to the Sunnah for the sake of the imam's feelings, but we say this for the sake of the Sunnah itself - if the expression is correct - , indeed for the explicit command of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in his previous saying: to the end of it, he says: .
When the imam prays while sitting, he prays as one who has an excuse. The imam who does not raise his hands in prayer does not raise them as one who has an excuse. The imam who prostrates by placing his hands on his knees does so as one who has an excuse, because he believes that this is the Sunnah. Let one of us imagine himself praying behind an imam from the previous imams, such as the Companions and their like. They were not all in agreement on every issue and every detail. For example, some Companions did not perform wudu after touching a woman, while others did perform wudu after touching a woman. There were Companions who did not perform wudu when blood came out, no matter how much it was, and others among them did perform wudu. Did any of them refuse to pray behind one who differed from him in legal opinion? The answer is no. When the imam stands up to lead the people in prayer, personal opinions are erased behind this imam. For example, if he touched his wife and did not perform wudu, and I hold the view that this touch invalidates wudu, my legal opinion is set aside when I pray behind this imam. And the reverse is the reverse: if the imam raises his hands, and Ibn Mas'ud used to raise his hands, and Ibn Mas'ud is known to be the basis for the Hanafis in raising the hands, did Ibn 'Umar, for example, not raise his hands if he followed Ibn Mas'ud? Meaning, did he not pray behind him? Did he say, "This contradicts 'Umar," or "This contradicts the Sunnah"? These matters did not separate them at all. So I say: if the validity or invalidity of the prayer is the point of difference, the disagreement is erased by following the imam. If one who considers the prayer invalid if he does as the imam does, finds that his prayer becomes valid if he prays behind that imam, it is because the imam's prayer is valid. So if you pray behind an imam who does not raise his hands and you leave off raising your hands, is that considered more dangerous, or if you pray behind an imam whose prayer is invalid according to your legal school? For example, I hold the view that eating camel meat invalidates wudu. If I see a man eat camel meat until he burps, and he stands up to pray without performing wudu, do I say, "My prayer is not valid behind him"? No; because following the imam erases all these differences.
Therefore, I return and say: let none of you ask and say, "How do we leave the Sunnah?" ...
We left the obligatory ... when we pray behind an imam whose prayer is not valid according to our point of view.
And therefore, I consider this issue to be one of the greatest matters that the Wise Lawgiver legislated in order to bring the many differences among Muslims closer together. When the one who follows a scholar sees that you pray behind him, he will first notice why he is praying behind you, and second, why he is following you. Then, if he leads the people in prayer as an imam, does he return to praying as he believes? He will know that all of this is among the effects of the Sunnah. And in reality, I adopt this issue.