Al-Humaydi mentioned that the prayer of the followers sitting behind a sitting imam is abrogated; what is the answer to this?

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

The questioner : Regarding the hadith we mentioned earlier , regarding its part , Al-Humaydi states that this is abrogated, meaning those who pray behind him. What is the position on this?

The Shaykh : And what abrogated it?

The questioner : The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed while sitting, and the Companions prayed while standing.

The Shaykh : And is it valid for a statement to be abrogated by an action? This is a rejected claim, for many reasons. The actions of the Messenger (peace be upon him) do not possess the same legislative strength as his statements. His prescribed actions, let alone what I call his non-worship actions, do not have the strength of his legislative statements. This is a matter agreed upon by scholars, who state that his statements (peace be upon him) are a general law, whereas his actions may or may not be a general law. Accordingly, Allah the Exalted said: . However, his action (peace be upon him) may not be a general law for one or more reasons. For example, he may have done something due to a need or circumstance that obligated him to do so, or he may have done it due to absolute permissibility, before a statement of his that contradicted the action came. Therefore, some scholars of usul al-fiqh stated, "If the statement of the Messenger (peace be upon him) contradicts his action, his statement is given precedence over his action." That is, if they contradict in a way that makes reconciliation impossible. But if there is room for reconciliation, then his statement (peace be upon him) and his action are reconciled. So here we have a command from the Messenger (peace be upon him) that the worshippers behind a sitting imam should pray sitting, and we have the fact that the Messenger (peace be upon him) led the people in prayer while sitting during his illness, and the people prayed behind him while standing. The rule is that we do not negate one of the two hadiths with the other if possible, but rather we reconcile them. Now let us look to see if there is room for reconciliation or not. The first thing that comes to mind in this matter is: does the action indicate obligation or permissibility? Each of you who has some knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence can answer this question so that we can build upon it. Does his action indicate the obligation of what he did, or its permissibility? What is your knowledge?

The questioner : It indicates permissibility.

The Shaykh : It indicates permissibility, but , what is the alternative? It indicates obligation. Good. So now, is the action here a stronger indication or the statement? The statement is stronger. It is possible to combine them. It is possible, as we are certain, to say: since the Messenger (peace be upon him) did it, it indicates permissibility, but he said it, so it indicates prohibition. Therefore, we consider his action. In the last part of his life, there is a circumstance indicating that the command is not for obligation, but for recommendation. So we say, based on this reconciliation, which I do not adopt as a definitive position, that it is permissible for people to pray behind the Messenger (peace be upon him) while standing, behind a sitting imam. They pray standing, but it is better for them to pray sitting, in execution of the command of the Messenger (peace be upon him). The Messenger and his Companions did not execute the explanation of permissibility because the Messenger, in his position of explaining the law of Allah, it is better for him, while performing this obligatory duty of conveying the message, to do what is better for the Muslims than to explain the recommended matter. This is one aspect of the reconciliation. We are now dedicating all our efforts to refuting the claim of abrogation. That is, we want to say, refuge in Allah, what abrogates the statement of the Messenger (peace be upon him), his action? No, his action clarifies that the command is not for obligation. But we still have other things that help us to decisively eliminate the claim of abrogation. Second, the claim of abrogation implies every form of the followers praying behind a sitting imam, whereas the form that occurred in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him), which Al-Humaydi made evidence of abrogation, is a form that may not recur. Even if it recurs, it is very rare, and the rare has no ruling. I mean the form where the Messenger (peace be upon him) appointed Abu Bakr to lead the people in prayer, and Abu Bakr actually led them. Then the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) felt some energy, so he came out to follow Abu Bakr. When Abu Bakr saw the Messenger come out, he was overjoyed. On one hand, on the other hand, he felt that the duration of his agency had ended, because the Messenger had appointed him, as he was unable to pray. He came to pray, and praise be to Allah, he was delayed. The Messenger (peace be upon him) took over the agency on behalf of his agent, meaning the ruling returned to its original state. Here remains this narrow form. This is rare to occur. Why? Because we can summarize the form: an imam started the prayer standing, then something happened that caused him to sit. In this case, the people followed him while he was standing. Now they continue their prayer standing, because the prayer was started with a standing imam. The Messenger (peace be upon him) was present, and since he could not pray standing, the people prayed behind him standing. This is the reconciliation of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who distinguishes between an imam who starts the prayer sitting, in which case they must sit with him, and an imam who starts the prayer standing, then something happens that causes him to sit, in which case they complete it standing. This form does not abrogate the ruling, but it restricts it. That is, it says that if this form recurs, we do as the Messenger and the Companions did. As for the principle, it is . This is point two. Point three: it is not possible to claim the abrogation of this legal ruling . Why?
Because the ruling that came in the Shari'ah is attributed to a cause that has existed since the beginning of time and has not been abrogated, the ruling linked to this cause cannot be abrogated. What is the cause? Imitating the disbelievers. It is reported in Sahih Muslim that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was thrown by his mount and injured in his elbow, the joint in the upper arm, and the time for the midday prayer arrived, but he was unable to pray standing, so he prayed sitting. He gestured to his companions to sit. This is the situation that is not abrogated, because he began the prayer sitting, and the congregation also, after he completed the prayer, he told them: . This hadith is very clear that his command (peace be upon him) to those praying behind him to stand was so that the resemblance would not appear between the Prophet sitting on one side and his companions standing behind him, and the kings of Persia and those who stand behind them, honoring him. To nullify this polytheistic phenomenon, he told them: sit. Therefore, the claim that this ruling is abrogated is inconsistent with the persistence of this legal ruling, which is the prohibition of imitating the disbelievers. So the claim that this hadith is abrogated is far from the truth. Third and finally, this entire tracing, or this entire explanation, is based on the assumption that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the imam in this incident, and that Abu Bakr was following him along with the congregation praying behind him. But there are other narrations that the imam was Abu Bakr himself, and the Prophet followed him. This led many hadith scholars, despite the hadith being in the two Sahihs, to say that the hadith is confused, meaning it is not known whether he was the ma'mum or the imam, because in some narrations it is this way, and in some narrations it is that way. The stronger view is that the story happened more than once. Sometimes he was the imam, and sometimes he was the ma'mum. And it is more likely, finally, that there is no abrogation in that. There is a narration in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, with a sound chain, from Tawus, as a mursal report, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in this incident where he led the people in prayer sitting while the people were standing behind him, said to them: , to the end of the hadith . Now, here the issue is reversed, and it is said that the ruling of the ma'mum praying standing behind the sitting imam is the abrogated one, because the last thing issued by the Messenger in Tawus's mursal narration is that in this incident, at the end of his life, he told them not to do this, but rather . Of course, here some of our brothers who share with us in the science of hadith might think of this and say: from Tawus's narration, and the hadith is mursal, and the mursal hadith is one of the types of weak hadith. Why are you arguing with it? We say: No, we are not arguing with it, we are only taking it as a reference, meaning we have completely removed Tawus's hadith from existence, and we have lost nothing, because our argument is not based on it. Our argument is based on the authentic, established hadiths in al-Bukhari and Muslim, . But we are in the process of refuting the statement of those who say that this hadith is abrogated by the action of the Messenger. We answered with many answers, among which is that the Messenger in this incident said: . And we do not need to authenticate the narration on this occasion, but we are content with citing it, not for using it as evidence, and in what is agreed upon betweenThe Shaykh : them regarding the authenticity of the hadith we mentioned at the beginning of this discussion, and in it is . So al-Humaydi's (may Allah have mercy on him) claim that this hadith is abrogated is far from the scientific principles. And every horse has a stumble, or even stumbles.

The questioner : May Allah give you health, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Who is going to call the adhan?

The questioner : ...but Abu Rami will come out.

The Shaykh : ...anyone who wants to perform wudu, then perform wudu...

The questioner : ...Shaykh Ali.

The Shaykh : ... .