Is it permissible to mix two recitations at the same time?

The Shaykh : Something else.

The questioner : In the same topic, some people say that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) or the noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) did not transmit to us that they recited by mixing the recitations.

The Shaykh : Mixing the recitations?

The questioner : By mixing the recitations, they consider this matter a religious innovation, mixing the recitations, or reading a recitation from another source. Another observation from their question: for example, in the Arab countries here, people recite according to Hafs. If you recite for them according to Warsh, with a complete recitation without mixing, they also deny this.

The Shaykh : That is what I answered earlier. But now, in your speech, there is a second question, which is mixing two recitations at the same time.

The questioner : They say that this is a religious innovation, and that it is not reported from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that he recited by mixing, or from the noble Companions.

The Shaykh : Yes, this requires an answer. In truth, I have heard this doubt and this objection from some of them since long ago. Those who say this is a religious innovation are in the same position as the followers of the four schools of jurisprudence. Just as the followers of the schools today, generally the scholars and well-known shaykhs, obligate the general Muslim population to follow one of these four schools, so if a Muslim lives, for example, among people who follow the school of Abu Hanifah, and then he establishes a ruling that is not established in his school but in another school, such as Malik or al-Shafi'i, they obligate him to adhere to the school and do not permit him to act according to what is established in the other school. We see this to be an error sometimes and correct at other times. That is, this denial is sometimes an error and sometimes correct. It is an error if the person following a specific school follows an opinion in another school out of his own desire, as the scholars and jurists call it, "following dispensations." This is denied against him. But if he takes an opinion from another school because he is convinced by it and its evidence, then this is what is obligatory for him, and whoever denies it against him is mistaken. This is, of course, the summary of the answer, and it requires a long study, but I am preparing for the answer regarding the mixing of recitations.
So I say: Just as the four schools of jurisprudence, where every imam takes what is stronger in his view of the knowledge, so the seven or ten reciters, each of them takes what is established for him. Knowing that the scope for error in jurisprudential issues is greater than the error in the transmitted or mass-transmitted recitations, as they say. This is because jurisprudential issues involve independent legal reasoning and analogical reasoning, so it is possible for a scholar qualified to derive rulings to fall into error and be rewarded for it. But the recitations are based on transmission only. If this is known, then if this reciter is on the recitation of Hafs, and the recitation of Warsh is established for him in a certain verse, and he combines in one recitation the recitation of Hafs in one verse and the recitation of Warsh in another verse, this is like combining following the Hanafi school and following the Shafi'i school in one issue and another; because that is what is established for him. So their saying that this is a religious innovation is, in reality, according to my view, negligence of the fact that the source of the imams of recitation is like the source of the imams of the four schools of jurisprudence: it is the Messenger (peace be upon him), with the great difference I mentioned earlier that the imams in jurisprudence may say something by independent legal reasoning and opinion, whereas in recitation there is only receiving and transmission. So the matter here is that the Messenger recited with the recitation of Hafs, certainly, and recited with the recitation of Warsh, certainly. So what prevents a person from reciting with this and that? And there is never any evidence from the reciters—and this is impossible—that the Messenger recited with the recitation of Hafs sometimes, and at another time recited with the recitation of Warsh, and so on for the known reciters. There is nothing of this kind. But each one took what was established for him. That is, the Messenger used to recite with this, and used to recite with this, and used to recite with this. One of the most famous things that all people can understand is that in Surat al-Fatihah there are two mass-transmitted recitations regarding: and . So the Messenger (peace be upon him) used to recite sometimes and sometimes . But he did not adhere to the rule that if he recited , he would recite what follows according to the school of Malik, excuse me, according to the school of Hafs; because then we would say, as some people imagine, that the Messenger was a Hanafi or a Shafi'i. No person says this, because the schools are later than the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). They receive from him, not the other way around. Therefore, the important point is: if a recitation from the recitations is established, it is permissible for the reciter to recite with this and to recite with that, and there is no harm in that. And as for the one who says this is a religious innovation, it suffices for us to say to him: and he will not be able to find a way to that.