Examples of Reports: Is it permissible for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to forget?

The Shaykh : Among these is what came in al-Muwatta' that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: This is a hadith with no basis. I had mentioned it in *Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah* and explained it in a similar manner, meaning that it has no chain of narration. Nevertheless, it is rejected from the angle of the Messenger (peace be upon him) denying the attribution of forgetfulness to him in this hadith, even though it is established in the authentic collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim that he (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: He (peace be upon him) is like a human being; he forgets just as they forget. However, this does not negate that there may be a wisdom in his (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) forgetfulness, from which a legal benefit follows, such as the hadith or story the Messenger (peace be upon him) mentioned in connection with this hadith: The story states that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) prayed the midday prayer with his Companions in five rak'ahs and concluded the prayer. One of them said to him, "O Messenger of Allah, did you add to the prayer?" He said: They said, "You prayed five rak'ahs." So he prostrated the prostrations of forgetfulness, then he said this hadith: Meaning, he was telling them that it was incumbent upon them to remind him of this addition of this rak'ah, meaning that they should say "Subhan Allah" as is the known recommended practice. Since this forgetfulness occurred from him (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) and a legal ruling followed from it, and many people today contradict this ruling which we derived from this incident, we have often heard questions coming in about stories similar to this one. An imam was praying a four-rak'ah prayer and stood up for the fifth rak'ah out of forgetfulness. The people behind him were disturbed; some followed him, some remained sitting in the tashahhud and concluded the prayer, separating from the imam, and some sat in the tashahhud waiting for the imam to return so they could conclude the prayer with him. The hadith states that the Companions followed the Messenger (peace be upon him) all of them; they stood up for the fifth rak'ah with him, all of them, and then concluded the prayer with him, all of them. So if a Muslim is afflicted with such a case, where he is following an imam who stands up for the fifth rak'ah out of distraction, he must follow him and it is not permissible for him to contradict him, as we mentioned earlier regarding what some of them do. It is not said here, as some people say, that the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) only followed him because they thought it was possible that a new legislation had come, making the four-rak'ah prayer five, and they followed him for that reason. If they had known that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) stood up out of forgetfulness, they would not have followed him. This is what some say. We say: Where do you get this from? Where do you prove that if such and such were the case, then such and such would be the case? Where does this come from? Moreover, this hypothesis contradicts two things. The first is the rule stated in the words of the Messenger himself: This rule is absolute and obligates the followers to follow the imam, even if the imam made a mistake in the view of the followers. Do you not see that if the imam forgets the first tashahhud and stands up for the third rak'ah, it is obligatory for the followers to follow him? The answer is yes, and this is established in the authentic Sunnah. This is the first matter regarding the obligation to follow the imam if he makes a mistake and stands up for the fifth rak'ah. The original rule is to follow the imam, and it is not permissible to depart from this original rule except with specific evidence, as we always say: We act according to the general text unless we find something that prevents us from acting according to it in part of its parts. The second thing: If the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), when they followed the Messenger and stood up with him for the fifth rak'ah, were mistaken, the Messenger (peace be upon him) would have clarified to them that you were mistaken and you should have remained sitting for the tashahhud, or at least he (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) would have clarified to those who come after us, after the legal rulings have settled and there is no addition or subtraction in them, that they should not follow the imam. This is because, as the scholars say, delaying clarification until the time of need is not permissible. If the Companions' following the Messenger to the fifth rak'ah was because the time was a time of legislation, and when the time of the end of legislation came, the Messenger (peace be upon him) would have clarified it to the people. Because, as we mentioned earlier, he (peace be upon him) said: So he did not leave the Muslims in doubt regarding any legal ruling. Among these rulings is: if the imam makes a mistake and stands up for the fifth rak'ah, do not follow him and do not contradict him, but rather he established that general rule: And in another wording: So the imam standing up for the fifth rak'ah out of distraction and the worshippers remaining in the tashahhud is, without a doubt, a contradiction of the imam, and that is something other than which is not permissible. There are ten minutes left in the time.

The questioner : May Allah reward you, O Shaykh. A man wants to travel to Europe out of necessity for medical treatment, and his wife works as a teacher. If he leaves her at home, no one will take her to school, considering that the one who takes her is a driver. Then he requested a leave to accompany a sick person with him, but he will not take her; rather, he will take a man, because if he takes her, it will delay him there. He only takes a sick person leave and then leaves her at her family's house. Is this leave permissible, considering that the wife's salary continues?

The Shaykh : What I understand from your question is that he takes a leave, and it is for accompanying the man, but in reality, she does not go with him. Of course, this does not need a question because it is blatant lying, so it is not permissible. Then, is there no one for this woman to stay with, such as a brother or a father or the like? It is necessary that the woman has someone to keep her company in the absence of her husband. So this does not necessitate that the husband falls into such lying. Yes.

The questioner : Do you mean the correct concept of this phrase: "We cooperate in what we agree upon and we excuse one another in what we differ upon"?

The Shaykh : But you were asking about something, and you finished with...

The questioner : Disavowal.

The Shaykh : I think in something, yes.