Addendum to the benefits of the hadith: (That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: (When you stand up for prayer, perform the ablution thoroughly...)).

The Shaykh : We said that bowing (ruku') is obligatory, and what is the limit of the obligatory? That one is able to touch his knees with his hands. Have we reached this point?
The student: Tranquility (tuma'ninah).

The Shaykh : Good, tranquility. We mentioned that the back bends, but if one is unable to bend, what does he do? He indicates (with his head) and bends to the extent he is able. This will come to us, if Allah wills, in the prayer of those with excuses. And if one is hunchbacked, his state in bowing and standing is the same, what does he do? He intends the bowing. For this reason, the jurists have a phrase: "And he intends it, the hunchbacked one who is unable," meaning the hunchbacked one who is unable intends the bowing. Ibn 'Aqil (may Allah have mercy on him) said, "Like *falak* in Arabic," like *falak* in Arabic, and what does that mean? That *falak* is suitable for both the singular and the plural, so it is said for the singular and it is said for the plural. Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) said: Yes, What is this? Singular or plural?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No, .
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Why? It is singular, my brothers; it applies to the singular. And His saying: this is plural. And there is no doubt that this comparison was made by way of approximation, otherwise one does not compare jurisprudence to grammar.
It is mentioned that Abu Yusuf, the companion of Abu Hanifah, and al-Kisa'i were with al-Rashid, or Harun al-Rashid. Al-Kisa'i claimed that whoever is good in the science of grammar can issue rulings in jurisprudence, meaning that if he masters one discipline of knowledge, he can grasp the other. So Abu Yusuf said to him, "What do you say if one forgets the prostration for forgetfulness (sujud al-sahw), does he have to perform the prostration for forgetfulness?" Al-Kisa'i said, "No, he does not have to perform the prostration for forgetfulness." He said, "Where did you take this from, from your rules?" He said, "From grammar." He said, "I have a rule that the diminutive does not diminish, that the diminutive does not diminish! And prostration, in relation to the prayer, is a diminutive." This was mentioned in a marginal note: "al-Rawd al-Murba'", and Allah knows best about its authenticity.
Good, let us return to our discussion. If a person is unable to bow but is able to stand, what does he do? He indicates the bowing and bends his back to the extent possible. If his back is bent like that of one bowing, how does he bow?
The student: By intention.

The Shaykh : By intention, good.
Meaning, it is necessary to straighten up and be tranquil after the bowing. Tranquility is by what? According to what the jurists said, it is stillness, even if it is little. And according to the other opinion, it is stillness for the duration of the obligatory dhikr. And it is known that standing up after the bowing does not contain any obligatory dhikr except saying "Our Lord, to You is praise" for the imam and the one praying alone. As for the one praying behind the imam, he says "Our Lord, to You is praise" while rising from the bowing.
And it was not specified in this hadith how to prostrate or on which limb one prostrates, but the Sunnah has come in other places that one prostrates on the seven limbs, which are the forehead and the nose following it, the two hands, meaning the palms, the two knees, and what? And the tips of the feet. And it is said what was said in . Then yes.
And from the benefits of this hadith is also the obligation of rising from the prostration and sitting between the two prostrations, due to his saying: Did you understand? Good. Do we say that it is sufficient to say Yes, and we say we are satisfied with saying that sitting between the two prostrations is one of the pillars, or must we say rising from the prostration and sitting? Meaning, do we count them as two things? The answer is the second, the second, because we say rising, and the second, yes, sitting.
If someone says, "If he sat, then he has risen, so there is no need to say rising," the answer is that there may be a need. Suppose he was prostrating and heard a crash. A crash, what is it?
The student: A sound, a sound.

The Shaykh : What? A fall or something with a sound, then he was startled while prostrating and stood up, and said, "Since I stood up, I want to sit and leave it as rising from the prostration." Does that make sense or not?
The student: It does not make sense.

The Shaykh : It does not make sense, because the rising must be an act of worship for Allah (Mighty and Majestic), meaning intending that it is part of the prayer, and this is what he intended. This is the secret: some scholars said rising from the prostration and sitting between the two prostrations, and although some of them said that it suffices for our saying "rising from the prostration," we say "sitting between the two prostrations." Good.
And from the benefits of this hadith is that if a person sits after the first prostration, it suffices for him to sit in any manner, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) in this hadith did not restrict it to a specific manner. But the Sunnah indicates that the sitting differs between the two tashahhuds and the sitting between the two prostrations. In the tashahhuds, if there are two tashahhuds in the prayer, the sitting for the first tashahhud is what? It is *iftirash* (sitting with the left foot flat and the right foot upright), and the sitting for the second tashahhud is *tawarruk* (sitting on the left foot with the right foot upright and the heel under the left foot) and placing the hands equally. In the sitting between the two prostrations, it is *iftirash* and *i'qa'* (sitting on the heels with the buttocks raised) according to the opinion of some scholars, but the correct view is that there is no *i'qa'* in it. And regarding the placement of the hands, the jurists said that they are to be spread out on the thighs, but the Sunnah indicates that the placement of the hands between the two prostrations is like their placement in the tashahhud.
The second prostration, and it is said about it what we said about the first phrase.
So from the benefits of this hadith is that prostrating twice is a pillar of the pillars of the prayer. So if one forgets one of the two prostrations in the last rak'ah and says the taslim, is his prayer valid?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : No. Good, what if he performed the prostration for forgetfulness?
The student: It is not valid.

The Shaykh : It is not valid, because the prostration for forgetfulness does not suffice for a pillar. But if he left the first tashahhud, it is valid. For this reason, some of the people praying behind the imam erred who forgot the second prostration of the last rak'ah, and he performed the tashahhud and said the taslim. So it was said to him that he had forgotten the last prostration, so he turned away and prostrated two prostrations for forgetfulness. Some of the people praying behind him addressed him and said, "We only prostrated once." He said, "These two prostrations make up for what was missing." What do you say? Is it an error?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Is his ignorance of its type?
The student: Compound.

The Shaykh : Compound. So the two prostrations do not suffice for the pillars. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not suffice with them when he said the taslim before completing the prayer.
Good, it is said that from the benefits of this hadith is the permissibility of referring to what is known, due to his saying: And the teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) came in this manner. When 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) asked the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) about the *kalalah* (inheritance of those who have no parents or children), he said to him: So he referred him to the end of Surat al-Nisa, because it is explicit in clarifying the meaning of *kalalah*. So referring is not a problem in matters of knowledge, but on the condition that it is known. As for if one refers to something that may be obscure, he says, for example, "The ruling is such, on the condition of this..." until you know the issue being referred to. But with ignorance, it is not permissible. The discussion on the benefits has ended, as far as we know now. Yes?

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : Yes.