We caught up with the imam just before the bowing; should we complete al-Fatihah and then bow, or should we follow the imam? The discussion is about following the imam.

The questioner : Our teacher, we entered the mosque during a secret prayer, either Zuhr or 'Asr, and we found the imam standing, so we stood with him...

The Shaykh : You stood with him?

The questioner : Standing means standing in prayer, but we had not completed al-Fatihah, and then the imam bowed. Is it permissible for us to complete al-Fatihah until he raises his head from the bowing, or should we catch up with the bowing?

The Shaykh : If the imam bows and the follower is not able to, or if the follower has not finished reciting al-Fatihah, he should recite as much as he estimates the imam will not raise his head from the bowing before he finishes, so that he will join him. If the follower estimates that he can read all of al-Fatihah and then join the imam in the bowing, he should complete it; otherwise, he should read the amount that will not cause him to miss catching up with the imam in the bowing. This, of course, has no explicit text, but it is based on juristic reasoning, because undoubtedly, the one who catches up with part of al-Fatihah is better than the one who catches up with the imam in the bowing. He says the takbir of intention, then the takbir of bowing; this is better than that. If it is established, and it is established by the Sunnah, that the one who catches up with the bowing catches up with the rak'ah, then a fortiori, the one who catches up with a portion of al-Fatihah before the bowing catches up with the rak'ah a fortiori. I had extracted the explicit hadith that the one who catches up with the bowing catches up with the rak'ah in *Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Sahihah*; I think it is in the third volume. The hadith is known to those engaged in the science of hadith from the Sunan of Abu Dawud, and its chain in the Sunan of Abu Dawud is weak and soft, but it is in the *Sunan al-Kubra* of al-Bayhaqi with a chain that does not have that weakness. It can be authenticated, but this is with the possibility of that, because Imam al-Bayhaqi narrated the hadith with a sound chain from 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Rafi' from a man of the Ansar that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Rafi' is a Tabi'i and he is trustworthy, one of the menThe Shaykh : about whom there is no disagreement among them. He says from a man of the Ansar. This man of the Ansar, if he was a Companion, the chain is sound because it is from the narration of a Tabi'i from a Companion. But there is no explicit statement in the chain that he was a Companion. Therefore, I said it is possible that it is sound. This possibility comes from what I have explained: this man of the Ansar, if he was a Companion, the chain is sound; and if he was a Tabi'i, it is mursal. But such a mursal has its status and weight with the imams. Why? Because it is not assumed that he would be a major Tabi'i. This is if he was not a Companion. This is how we dealt with this chain, and it is not the chain of the hadith in the Sunan of Abu Dawud. Then the problem disappeared and the possibility fell, and it was established for us that the man was a Companion, because I found the hadith with the sound chain in *Mas'al al-Marwazi* from Imam Ahmad and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, a very old manuscript, perhaps dating back to the third century, preserved in the Zahiriyyah Library. Al-Marwazi narrates with a sound chain through the route of 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Rafi', who said: "A man of the Ansar told me, who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say..." So the problem and the hesitation in which we were hesitating were resolved by authenticating the hadith and connecting the chain. This is because the Companions, according to the people of the Sunnah, are all just, and the ignorance of the name of a Companion does not harm. So this sound chain was sufficient to prove that the one who catches up with the imam in the bowing has caught up with the rak'ah. And it is considered for reconciling the hadiths; it is considered a specifier for the generality of his saying (peace be upon him) , . And if that is joined with the route of Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan, which is from his narration from Abu Hurayrah and another Companion, one supports the other, especially the chain of Abu Dawud which has that softness; it is undoubtedly strengthened by the chain of al-Marwazi, which is sound in itself. This is the answer to what you asked: the one who catches up with something of al-Fatihah behind the imam and then catches up with the imam in the bowing, his prayer is valid.


The questioner : ... contradicts the imam ... al-Fatihah ... is that taken into account?

The Shaykh : I mean, he contradicts the imam, he lags behind him.

The questioner : ... if he prostrates...

The Shaykh : No, it contradicts many texts, many of which include his saying (peace be upon him) , and among them is his saying (peace be upon him) in the hadith of Anas ibn Malik . It is not permissible for the follower to contradict the imam, even if the imam prays sitting due to an illness that afflicted him. Knowing that standing for the healthy and sound person is a pillar of the prayer, and the prayer is not valid without it. So we find in this hadith that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) dropped this pillar for all the healthy followers behind him so that they would join him in his posture and not contradict him in the form of his prayer. So how would a person who prays behind the imam, because he was not able to read al-Fatihah, say: "This is a pillar, and standing is a pillar, so the Messenger of Allah dropped it to achieve following"? Here, in the issue we were in just now, he reads as much of al-Fatihah as he can and does not miss following the imam, because he would fall into another contradiction. And here, when he reads what he can and joins the imam in the bowing, he has not contradicted anything in the manner mentioned before, namely that the one who catches up with the bowing catches up with the rak'ah, and for the hadith I mentioned just now, until he said: .

The questioner : O Shaykh, they say that standing was abrogated. They say that standing was abrogated by the hadith of what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did when he was ill; he prayed sitting and Abu Bakr was standing beside him. Does this abrogate these many earlier hadiths?

The Shaykh : This is indeed what some scholars say, but the evidence does not stand for its correctness. This is because a statement is not always abrogated by an action; rather, a statement is generally stronger than an action. For this reason, the scholars of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) say that if two authentic texts conflict, one being from his (peace and blessings be upon him) actions and the other from his words, and reconciliation is not possible by any means, then the statement is adopted and relied upon, and the action is left aside. This is because the action may have several possibilities, such as it being due to an excuse, or it being before the legislation that came in the verbal hadith, or it being a specific privilege of the Messenger. His (peace and blessings be upon him) actions are surrounded by possibilities that do not surround his words, because his (peace and blessings be upon him) words are general legislation for the Ummah. This is if it is established that the action was later than the statement. If that is not established, then it is far from possible that a statement can be abrogated by an action. There is also another matter: a statement cannot be abrogated by an action, even if his (peace and blessings be upon him) action was later than his statement, as long as that statement is attributed to a cause that does not accept abrogation. His (peace and blessings be upon him) previously mentioned statement , its attribution came in Sahih Muslim from the narration of Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah al-Ansari : and the hadith was mentioned to its end, In this hadith, there is an important benefit, which is that the command of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in this hadith is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) only commanded those standing behind him and following him to sit in order to abolish this polytheistic phenomenon that appears from some of the disbelieving kings and polytheists. Know that there is a very large difference between that phenomenon and this situation that occurred for the Companions behind the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This is clear to everyone, if Allah wills. But there is no harm in giving an example, such as Kisra and the like of the tyrants when they sit and the ministers and great ones around them stand up while he sits, seeking to be honored, and those around him stand to fulfill his desire. Meanwhile, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) sat out of necessity, and He is the one to whom Allah revealed His (Mighty and Majestic) saying: He is the first of the worlds to know the obligation of standing, but Allah does not burden a soul beyond its capacity. So he sat out of necessity; he did not sit like Kisra and the like of him. As for the Companions, they also stood behind him to fulfill the previous verse: They did not stand, and it did not cross the mind of any one of them, especially in prayer, to stand to honor the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Rather, he stood for Allah, Lord of the worlds. It would not have crossed their minds to stand for him (peace and blessings be upon him) outside of prayer, so how could they stand for him in the middle of prayer while they know, as his servant Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) told us in his famous authentic hadith, narrated in al-Adab al-Mufrad of Imam al-Bukhari and in Sunan al-Tirmidhi with a sound chain according to the conditions of Muslim, from Anas ibn Malik, he said: In the narration of , when he entered the gathering, it was part of his (peace and blessings be upon him) known etiquette, character, and humility that he would sit where the gathering ended, and no one would stand for him. Why? Because they did not honor him? in the noble Qur'anic text. They are the most honoring of their Prophet and the most knowledgeable of all people of his (peace and blessings be upon him) status, but within the limits of what Allah legislated, because he (peace and blessings be upon him) raised them and educated them in the best education that can be on the face of the earth. If these Companions did not even think to stand for him to honor him when he entered their gathering, not in prayer, then it would not cross the mind of any one of them to stand behind the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) while he was praying sitting, and they were standing, to honor him, given this difference between this image of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions, and that image of the story and his companions. Despite that, he said to them: , and this hadith indicates to us something important. We see many young Muslims, and among them some students of knowledge, who assume that the forbidden and prohibited imitation (tashabbuh) in the Shari'ah is that which a Muslim intends to imitate a disbeliever. That is not the case. Imitation is a phenomenon of appearance; one does not look at what is in the heart of the imitator, but rather at his action. The greatest proof of this is what we are currently discussing: they were in prayer It did not cross the mind of any one of them to honor the Messenger with this standing. Despite that, he said to them Is it permissible for them to stand behind the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) after that, if he became ill and prayed sitting? They do not do that. Therefore, he said: . The point is that this is a ruling attributed to a cause. It is possible to abrogate a ruling, but it is not possible to abrogate a ruling attributed to a cause, and this cause continues until the Day of Resurrection. This is of that nature. Therefore, if it is established that the prayer of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in his illness of death is true, there is a lot of confusion in the hadiths of this prayer, which scholars of hadith object to. In some narrations that are sound in chain, the imam was Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) and the Prophet was praying behind him. This was in the last prayer he prayed. In another narration, also sound, the imam was the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and Abu Bakr was making the takbir of those behind him from the worshippers audible. Despite this confusion, if we accept that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the imam and the people prayed behind him standing, then there are two answers:
The first answer is narrated from Imam Ahmad, reconciling this incident with the hadith of This reconciliation is based on the fact that this incident, where the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed sitting and the people behind him were standing, was after his statement Imam Ahmad, the Imam of the Sunnah, says that the reconciliation between the two hadiths is: the verbal hadith means that if the imam begins his prayer sitting, then the people should pray sitting with him. But if he begins the prayer standing and then an obstacle occurs and he is forced to sit, then there is no harm in the people continuing to pray behind him standing.
The second reconciliation: I benefited from it from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) in his book "Iqtida' al-Sirat al-Mustaqim Mukhalafat Ahl al-Jahim". He said, "It is not possible to abrogate the hadith with this incident, if it is established that it was after the hadith. Rather, they are combined by one of two ways. I mentioned the first, and the second is that the hadith clarifies that the command is not for obligation, but rather for recommendation. If the command is for recommendation, then it is permissible to do it and permissible to leave it. As for abrogation and cancellation, as some schools of jurisprudence say that it is not permissible for the healthy, sound-bodied person to pray while the imam is sitting, then there is no way to say that." This is the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah. Then I found in the book Fath al-Bari by al-Hafiz Ahmad ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani a mursal narration. I do not remember it now because the time is far, but he is one of two men, either 'Ata' or Tawus, with a sound chain from him, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: In that case, the abrogated thing is what is narrated that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed sitting and the people behind him were standing. This is what is on my mind regarding speaking about this issue.