You mentioned that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) entered the prayer while not in a state of ritual purity, then remembered and went out and gestured to them.

The questioner : Regarding continuing the prayer: I heard one of your tapes in which you mentioned that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) stood up to lead his companions in prayer and remembered that he was not in a state of ritual purity, so he said: He went, then returned with water dripping from him, said the takbir, and prayed. You mentioned there the word "continuing" (building upon), that he continued. How is the process of continuing carried out first? Then, in this prayer, in this hadith you mentioned, did the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) pray with them and then go to perform ghusl, or was it before the takbir?

The Shaykh : The answer is that there are two hadiths: one from Abu Hurayrah and the other from Abu Bakrah al-Thaqafi. The first hadith states that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) stood up to pray the Fajr prayer and remembered before saying the takbir that he was in a state of major ritual impurity, so he went and performed ghusl, then came and prayed with them. This hadith is not our subject. The second hadith, which is our topic, is the hadith of Abu Bakrah: Regarding this second hadith, we say that it indicates the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) continued from what he had prayed before. Here there is a point of disagreement among scholars: if something occurs for the one praying that invalidates his prayer, such as, for example, while he is praying, something comes out of him that breaks the wudu, according to the known invalidators of wudu among scholars. For example, nosebleed: some say that a nosebleed breaks the wudu. If he holds that view, his wudu is broken; the blood came out, his wudu is broken. As for the invalidators, as he (peace be upon him) said: These are invalidators on which there is consensus. So if any invalidator comes out of the one praying, and he then goes and performs wudu, does he continue his prayer? That is, does he consider the past prayer that he prayed in a state of purity, and then that purity was broken? Does this broken purity invalidate the previous prayer, or does that prayer remain valid? Here there are two opinions among scholars. Some say he continues from what has passed; that is, if he prayed, for example, one rak'ah and his wudu was broken by one of the invalidators, the meaning of "continuing" is that the rak'ah he prayed, as long as he prayed it in a state of purity, is a valid rak'ah. So if he renews his wudu, he continues; that is, if he was praying Fajr, he does not come with two rak'ahs, but only with one rak'ah. As for the one who says he restarts the prayer, the meaning of that is that that rak'ah has no value, so he begins the prayer anew. The hadith of Abu Bakrah is among the authentic hadiths that indicate that the one who is afflicted with something that invalidates his prayer continues from what he prayed, as long as he was excused. And among the excuses is forgetfulness, and this is what happened to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) in the story of Abu Bakrah, where he entered the prayer while in a state of major ritual impurity, then went and performed ghusl, and came back with water dripping from his head, and prayed. He did not say, "I began the prayer." This is one aspect. From another aspect, if he (peace be upon him) had wanted to make it clear to his ummah that such an incident that occurred did not require him to gesture to them, to say to them with a hand gesture, "Stay in your places," but rather he would say to them with his tongue, "I have become invalid, my prayer is invalid because I remembered that I was not in a state of purity, so sit and rest until I come to you." But rather, he gestured to them with a gesture without explicitly stating it in words, and secondly, he stopped them as if they were in prayer, and in reality they were in prayer. These are signs that confirm that his saying "and he prayed" means he completed the prayer. So if it is clear to you what is meant by the word "continuing" first?

The questioner : I would like further clarification, may Allah bless it.

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner : That he was in a state of major ritual impurity, so if he prayed with them one rak'ah, for example, if an imam prayed with them one rak'ah, then according to what I said, he continues with them from the first rak'ah!

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : Well, do we not say that there is the rule that states: "What is built upon a defective foundation is itself defective"? So his prayer was originally defective because he was originally in a state of major ritual impurity?

The Shaykh : What is the evidence that it is defective?

The questioner : That he was originally in a state of major ritual impurity when he entered the prayer!

The Shaykh : No problem, my brother, but we say this was not intentional; this was a forgetful person. This question is exactly like the ruling on one who eats in Ramadan while forgetting; does it invalidate his fast? The answer is no, because he was forgetting. Is it valid to analogize the forgetful person with the intentional one? We say the one who eats in Ramadan while forgetting is like the one who eats in Ramadan intentionally; they are not equal, for example. So when we want to say: "What is built upon a defective foundation is itself defective," the rule is correct, but we will apply the same rule: "What is built upon a defective foundation is itself defective." We say you are building upon a defective foundation, why? Because there is no evidence that the one who prays while forgetting his wudu and remembers this wudu, or forgetting his major ritual impurity and remembers it while in prayer, and builds upon it, if he built upon a defective foundation, no, we need evidence, and the evidence now is contrary to the claim. Is that clear?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you.

Another questioner : Our Shaykh, clarification.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

The questioner : Why do we say that the one who prays a complete prayer while not in a state of purity and is forgetting...

The Shaykh : Because of the athar of 'Umar.

Another questioner : We say if we follow the hadith, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) considered the rak'ah valid.

The Shaykh : If the hadith were after the prayer, if the story were as it happened to 'Umar, we would say according to the hadith, but the hadith is specific to a particular detail, so we applied it. The athar of 'Umar is in a broader detail than that, so we applied it and placed everything in its proper place.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, in this specific issue, some schools of jurisprudence refer to turning one's back to the qiblah? How do we act here, given that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was undoubtedly facing the qiblah?

The Shaykh : No, we do not say it is certain; it is possible. This means it is possible, for example, here, that a person remembers not to turn away from the qiblah, he comes and performs wudu, stands here and performs wudu, this is possible. So if it is possible, he must strive not to turn away from the qiblah. But if it is unavoidable that the place is behind the qiblah, he must go to it turning away from the qiblah. Turning away from the qiblah is exactly like a state of ritual impurity. Each of them, facing the qiblah is a condition, and purity is a condition, but this purity, if it is excused due to a legal excuse, so too is turning one's back to the qiblah subject to the same ruling. When it is not possible otherwise.

Another questioner : Our Shaykh, if the imam remembers while in ruku' or sujud, does he keep the praying people in this position? And is it permissible for him, from our understanding of the previous hadith, that he gestured to them, does this mean it is not permissible for him to speak with them?

The Shaykh : Is it not permissible for him to speak?

Another questioner : For example, they were prostrating...

The Shaykh : Do not repeat the scenario, I understood the scenario. So your final question is that it is not permissible for the imam to speak?

Another questioner : Is it permissible for him to speak with them or just hint to them?

The Shaykh : This varies depending on the congregation he is leading. If they are accustomed to him and understand him, if he gestures to them to stay in their places, it is not permissible for him to speak because he is still in prayer. But if the congregation is not like that, as is the reality today, then one of them must take his place, and this is a consequence of the previous ruling, meaning the previous prayer remains valid, so one of them is brought forward to complete the prayer with them. So the issue varies from one congregation to another.

Another questioner : Our Shaykh, here, when the imam returns and takes his place, assuming he returned and caught part of the prayer, what is his status now? That is, he prayed with them something...

The Shaykh : I understood, my brother.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : What is his status? Suppose he was praying Fajr and prayed with them one rak'ah, he comes and completes according to the situation. If he had previously completed the rak'ah, that is, with its ruku' and sujud and its two prostrations, it is considered that he caught a rak'ah. Otherwise, if he did not pray a rak'ah, he prays two rak'ahs.

Another questioner : Meaning, our Shaykh, he starts the prayer anew or not?

The Shaykh : No, no, he does not start anew. If he did not speak and did not do anything that intentionally invalidates the prayer, he is in prayer. I do not know if you got the answer to your question?