Sehemu hii inahusu vitendo vya sala ambavyo haviwi kuchukuliwa kuwa vimetekelezwa kwa wakati, navyo ni kurudia (iSdda), kutekeleza kwa kuchelewesha (qadd?), na kurekebisha (jabr) ziada au upungufu kwa njia ya sujuud (za kusahau). Katika sehemu hii kuna sura tatu. Sura ya kwanza inahusu fidda (kurudia au kutekeleza tena). Sura ya pili inahusu qadd> (kutekeleza kwa kuchelewesha). Sura ya tatu inashughulikia kurekebisha kunakofanywa kwa sujuud.

This part covers the acts of prayer that are not considered performed on time and these are repetition (iSdda), delayed performance (qadd?), and rectification (jabr) of excesses or shortfalls by means of prostrations (for forgetfulness). In this part there are thus three chapters. The first chapter is about fidda (repetition or re-performance). The second chapter is about qadd> (delayed performance). The third chapter covers rectification that is accomplished with prostrations.

Mada ya sura hii inahusu sababu zinazolazimu kurudia sala, nazo ni mambo yanayoharibu sala. Wamekubaliana kwamba mtu anayeswali bila kutawadha, awe kwa makusudi au kwa kusahau, analazimika kurudia sala yake (baada ya kutawadha). Vilevile mtu anayeswali akielekea upande usio kibla, awe kwa makusudi au kwa kosa. Kwa jumla, basi, mtu anayekiuka moja ya masharti ya sala analazimika kuirudia sala (kwa njia iliyo sahihi). (Yote haya ni kwa makubaliano ya wanazuoni wa fiqhi.) Wanazuoni walitofautiana kutokana na mzozo wao kuhusu masharti yanayoifanya sala kuwa sahihi.

The discussion in this chapter relates to the causes that require repetition of a prayer, and these are factors vitiating prayer. They agreed that a person who prays without purification, whether intentional or due to forgetfulness, is obliged to repeat his prayer (after purification). Similarly, one who prays in a direction other than the qibla, whether by intention or by mistake. On the whole, then, a person who violates one of the conditions of prayer is under an obligation of a repeat performance (in the correct way). (All this is by agreement of the jurists.) The jurists disagreed because of their dispute over the validating conditions.

Masuala mengine yenye mjadala yanayohusiana na mada hii yako nje ya mambo ya msingi ya Sala. Mojawapo ni makubaliano yao kwamba kutokea kwa sababu ya hadath (kupoteza hali ya utwahara) kunabatilisha Sala. Walitofautiana, katika hali hii, juu ya kama inalazimu kurudia Sala tangu mwanzo, ikiwa ni pamoja na rakaa moja au mbili zilizokamilika kabla ya kutokea kwa hadath, au kuendelea na Sala kwa kujengea juu ya kile kilichokwisha kufanywa. Wengi walishikilia kwamba mtu haijengi juu ya ile iliyopita, wala katika hali ya hadath wala kwa sababu nyingine inayobatilisha Sala (kama kufanya harakati zisizoruhusiwa), isipokuwa katika kesi ya kutokwa damu puani peke yake. Baadhi yao walikuwa na maoni kwamba mtu haijengi juu ya ile iliyopita kabisa, iwe ni kwa hadath au kwa kutokwa damu puani. Huu ndio msimamo wa al-Shafi'i. Wanachuoni wa Kufa walishikilia kwamba mtu anajenga juu ya Sala iliyopita katika kila aina ya hadath.

There are disputed issues related to this topic that are beyond the basic elements of prayer. One of these is their agreement that the occurrence of a cause of hadath (losing the state of purification) terminates (invalidates) prayer. They disagreed, in this case, on wherher it requires the repetition of prayer from the beginning, including a rakfa or two completed prior to the occurrence of hadath, or to continue the prayer based on that already performed. The majority maintained that he is not to base it on continuation neither in the case of hadath nor for another terminating cause (like making unauthorized movements), except in the case of a nosebleed alone. Some of them were of the view that he does not base it on continuation at all, either for hadath or for a nosebleed. This is al-ShafiTs opinion. The Kufts maintained that he is to base the prayer on continuation in all kinds of hadath.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao ni kwamba hakuna simulizi iliyopokelewa kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ inayoruhusu jambo hili (yaani kuendelea na sala) katika hali kama hii, lakini imethibitika kwamba Ibn Umar alitokwa na damu puani, na akatumia kuendelea na sala (baada ya kuosha damu hiyo) bila kutawadha tena kuwa msingi wa kurudia sala. Wale waliodai kwamba kitendo hiki cha Sahaba kinatosha kuwa mfano wa kufuatwa, kwa kuwa hakuweza kukifanya kwa kutumia qiyas, waliruhusu kitendo hicho. Wale ambao kutokwa na damu puani hakuvunji hali ya hadathi waliruhusu kuendelea na sala katika kutokwa na damu puani peke yake, na hii ndiyo maoni ya Malik. Wale ambao kutokwa na damu puani ni sababu ya hadathi waliruhusu kuendelea na sala katika kesi zote za hadathi kwa msingi wa qiyas. Na wale waliodai kwamba kitendo cha Sahaba hakitegemewi isipokuwa kikiwa ni mfano kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ, hawakuruhusu kuendelea na sala, wala katika hali ya hadathi wala katika kutokwa na damu puani, kwa sababu kuna makubaliano kwamba mwabudu anayesali akielekea upande usio wa Qibla ameharibu sala yake, na pia anapofanya harakati nyingi mno.

The reason for their disagreement is that there is no recorded, tradition of permissibility from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in such a case (i.e. continuation), but it is established that Ibn TJmar had a nosebleed and based the (repetition of the) prayer on continuation (after washing away his blood and) without performing ablution. Those who maintained that this act on the part of a Companion amounts to a precedent, for he could not have based such an act upon analogy, permitted such an act. Those for whom a nosebleed does not amount to hadath permitted continuation in the case of a nosebleed only, and this is Malik’s opinion. Those for whom a nosebleed is a cause of hadath permitted continuation in all cases of hadath on the basis of analogy. And those who maintained that an act of a Companion is not to be relied upon unless it is a precedent from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), did not permit continuation either in the case of hadath or a nosebleed, for there is consensus on the point that a worshipper praying in a direction other than the qibla has breached his prayer and also when he is making excessive movements.

Wanafikihi walitofautiana kuhusu iwapo kupita kwa kitu mbele ya mwabudu huvunja sala yake pale anaposali bila kizuizi (sutra), au pale kitu hicho kinapopita kati yake na kizuizi. Wengi wa wanazuoni wanashikilia kwamba hakuna hata kimoja kati ya hivi kinachovunja sala, na mwabudu hana wajibu wa kurudia sala. Kundi la wanafikihi lilishikilia kwamba sala hukatika kwa kupita kwa mwanamke, punda, au mbwa mweusi.

The jurists disagreed on whether the passing of something in front of the worshipper terminates his prayer when he is praying without a curtain (sutra), or when the thing passes between him and the curtain. The majority maintain that none of these terminates the prayer, and there is no obligation for repetition on the worshipper. A group of jurists maintained that prayer is cut off by (the passing of) a woman, a donkey, or a black dog.

Sababu ya kutofautiana huku ni mgongano kati ya kauli na tendo. Muslim amepokea kutoka kwa Abu Dharr kwamba Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake) alisema: "Mwanamke, punda, na mbwa mweusi [anapopita mbele ya mwenye kuswali] huharibu swala." Muslim na al-Bukhari wamepokea kutoka kwa 'Aisha kwamba alisema: "Nilijikuta nimelala mbele ya Mjumbe wa Mwenyezi Mungu ﷺ wakati alipokuwa akiswali, kama vile mwili wa maiti unavyowekwa." Maoni yanayofanana na ya wengi yamepokewa kutoka kwa Ali na kutoka kwa Ubayy. Hakuna mzozo miongoni mwa wanazuoni wa fiqhi kuhusu kuchukizwa kwa kitu kupita mbele ya mtu mmoja anayeswali peke yake, au mbele ya imamu anaposwali bila sutra, au kupita kati yake na sutra. Hata hivyo, waliona hakuna ubaya katika kupita kitu nyuma ya pazia. Vilevile, waliona hakuna ubaya katika kupita mbele ya wafuasi, kwa sababu ya hadithi sahihi ya Ibn 'Abbas na wengine. Ibn 'Abbas alisema: "Nilikuja nikiwa juu ya mgongo wa punda, nilipokuwa karibu kubaleghe, na Mjumbe wa Mwenyezi Mungu ﷺ alikuwa akiwaongoza watu katika swala. Nilipita mbele ya baadhi ya safu. Nilishuka, nikamwacha punda akila, nikajiunga na mojawapo ya safu. Hakuna aliyepinga kitendo changu." Kwa mtazamo wao, hili linafanana na musnad (yaani hadithi inayohusishwa na Mtume ﷺ), lakini hili linahitaji uchunguzi.

The reason for this disagreement is the conflict of a pronouncement with an act, as Muslim has recorded from Abu Dharr that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “A woman, a donkey, and a black dog [passing before a worshipper in prayer] cut off prayer”. Muslim and al- BukharT, (on the other hand), have recorded from cAJisha that she said, “I found myself lying in front of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), when he was praying, in the same way as the body in a funeral is placed”. Opinions similar to that of the majority have been related from AII and from Ubayy. There is no dispute among the jurists about the abomination of something passing in front of a single worshipper (praying alone) or in front of the imam when praying without a sutra, or of passing between him and the sutra. They saW no harm, however, in passing anything behind the curtain. Likewise, they saw no harm in passing in front of the followers, because of the authenticated tradition of Ibn cAbbas, and of others. Ibn cAbbas said, “I came on the back o f a donkey, when I was approaching puberty, and the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was leading the people in prayer. I passed in front of some of the rows. I dismounted, leaving the ass to graze, and joined one of the rows. No one objected to my act”. This, in their view’, resembles a musnad (i.e. a tradition attributed to the Prophet), but this is subject to scrutiny.

Walitofautiana kuhusu kutoa kigugumizi (kubwata) wakati wa sala; kuna maoni matatu. Kundi moja la wanazuoni wa fiqhi liliona kuwa ni jambo chukizo, lakini halikumlazimisha mtu aliyetoa kigugumizi kurudia sala. Kundi jingine likaona kuwa ni wajibu kwa mtu aliyetoa kigugumizi kurudia sala. Kundi la tatu likatofautisha kati ya kigugumizi kilichosikika na kile ambacho hakikusikika. Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na kutoeleweka kwa ufafanuzi wa kigugumizi, iwapo ni kauli (usemi) au si kauli.

They disagreed about belching during prayer; there are three opinions. One group of jurists regarded it as an abomination, but did not impose repetition of prayer on the person who belched. Another group made repetition obligatory on a person belching. A third group made a distinction between that which was heard and that which was not. The reason for their disagreement stems from the vacillation of (the definition of) belching between being Speech and non-speech.

Walikubaliana kwamba kicheko kinabatilisha swala. Walitofautiana kuhusu tabasamu. Tofauti yao kuhusu tabasamu inatokana na swali la iwapo linaweza kupewa hukumu ya kicheko.

They agreed that laughter cuts off prayer. They disagreed about smiling. Their disagreement about smiling is based on the question of whether it can take the ruling of laughter.

Walitofautiana kuhusu sala ya mtu anayezuia haja (hdqin). Wengi wa wanazuoni wa fiqhi wanaona ni makruhu kwa mtu kusali wakati anazuia haja, kwa sababu ya hadithi ya Zayd ibn Arqam, aliyesema: "Nilimsikia Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ akisema: 'Ikiwa mmoja wenu anataka kwenda chooni, na aende kabla ya kuanza sala'", na kwa sababu ya yaliyopokelewa kutoka kwa 'Aisha kutoka kwa Nabii ﷺ kwamba alisema: "Asisali mtu mbele ya chakula, wala wakati anazuia zile najisi mbili", yaani mkojo na kinyesi, na pia kwa sababu ya riwaya ya katazo kutoka kwa 'Umar.

They disagreed about the prayer of the person suppressing the call of nature (hdqin). The majority of the jurists consider abominable that a person should pray while he is suppressing the call of nature, because of the tradition of Zayd ibn Arqam, who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) saying, ‘If one of you desires to go to the privy, he should do so before commencing prayer’ ”, and because of what is related from <A>isha from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “No one should pray in the presence of food, nor when he is suppressing the two dirts”, that is, urination and defecation, and also because of the report of the proscription from TJmar.

Kundi la wanazuoni lilishikilia kwamba sala ya mtu wa namna hii si sahihi, na ni lazima airudie. Riwaya ya Ibn al-Qasim kutoka kwa Malik inaonyesha kwamba sala ya mtu anayezuia haja ya mwili (haja ya choo) ni batili. Sababu yake ni kwamba alimnukuu akisema kwamba mtu wa namna hiyo lazima arudie sala kabla ya kumalizika kwa wakati wake, la sivyo ni lazima ailipe baadaye kama qada.

A group of jurists maintained that prayer of such a person is not valid, and he has to repeat it. Ibn al-Qasim’s report from Malik indicates that the prayer of a person suppressing the call of nature is invalid. The reason^is that he reported from him that such a person must repeat the prayer before the expiry of the time, otherwise he has to do so as qadd>.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na mzozo wao kuhusu katazo, kama linaonyesha kwamba kitendo kilichokatazwa ni batili, au kinaonyesha tu kwamba kitendo hicho katika hali hiyo ni dhambi, pale ambapo kitendo kilichokatazwa kiko awali kuwa wajibu au ruhusa. Wale walioshikilia kwamba sala ya namna hiyo ni batili walitegemea simulizi iliyopokewa na Washami, huku wengine wakiipokea kutoka kwa Thawbān, na wengine kutoka kwa Abu Hurayra, kutoka kwa Nabii ﷺ, aliyesema: "Si halali kwa Muumini kusali wakati anazuia kwa nguvu haja ya mwili." Abu 'Umar alisema kwamba ni simulizi yenye usimulizi dhaifu, kwa hiyo haina nguvu ya kisheria.

The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute over the proscription whether it indicates the invalidity of the (performance of the) thing prohibited, or it merely indicates the sinfulness of the act in that condition, when the act so proscribed is originally obligatory or permissible. Those who upheld the invalidity of such a prayer relied on the tradition reported by the Syrians, with some reporting it from Thawban, while others from Abu Hurayra from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), who said, “It is not permitted for a believer to pray when he is forcibly suppressing the call of nature”. Abu TJmar said that it is a tradition with a weak transmission, and it therefore has no legal force.

Walitofautiana kuhusu kujibu salamu ya mtu anayeswali. Kundi la wanazuoni, miongoni mwao ni Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab, al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan al-Basri, na Qatada, waliruhusu hilo. Kundi jingine lilikataza kujibu kwa maneno, lakini likaruhusu kwa ishara, na hii ndiyo kauli ya Malik na al-Shafi'i. Wengine walikataza kujibu kwa maneno au kwa ishara, na hii ndiyo kauli ya Nu'man. Kundi moja liliruhusu kujibu kimoyomoyo (kwa ndani), huku wengine wakisema kwamba anapaswa kujibu baada ya kumaliza kuswali.

They disagreed about responding to the salutation by the praying worshipper. A group of jurists, among whom are Sa Td ibn al-Musayyab, al-Hasan ibn al- c Hasan al-BasrT, and Qatada, permitted it. Another group disallowed responding in words, but permitted it with a gesture, and this is the opinion of Malik and aI-Shafi T. Others c prohibited responding by words or by gesture, and this is the opinion of Nu(mam. One group permitted an inward (silent) response, while others said that he should respond when he has finished praying.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na swali la kama kujibu salamu ni aina ya usemi wakati wa sala, ambao umekatazwa. Wale walioshikilia kwamba ni aina ya usemi uliokatazwa katika sala, na wakaifunga aya isemayo, "Mnapoamkiwa kwa salamu, basi amkieni kwa iliyo bora kuliko hiyo au ijibuni"148 kwa Hadithi zinazokataza kusema wakati wa sala, walisema kwamba si halali kujibu wakati wa sala. Wale walioshikilia kwamba haimo katika usemi uliokatazwa, pamoja na wale waliozifunga Hadithi zinazokataza kwa amri ya kujibu salamu, waliruhusu

The reason for their disagreement stems from whether the response to a salutation is a kind of speech during prayer, which is proscribed. Those who maintained that it is a kind of speech prohibited in prayers, and restricted the verse, “When ye are greeted with a greeting, greet ye with a better than it or return it”148 with traditions proscribing speech during .prayer, said that it is not permitted to respond during prayer. Those who maintained that it is not included in the prohibited speech, and those who restricted the proscribing traditions with the command for responding to a greeting, permitted a

Walitofautiana kuhusu kujibu salamu ya mtu anayeswali. Kundi la wanazuoni, miongoni mwao ni Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab, al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan al-Basri, na Qatada, waliruhusu hilo. Kundi jingine lilikataza kujibu kwa maneno, lakini likaruhusu kwa ishara, na hii ndiyo kauli ya Malik na al-Shafi'i. Wengine walikataza kujibu kwa maneno au kwa ishara, na hii ndiyo kauli ya Nu'man. Kundi moja liliruhusu kujibu kimoyomoyo (kwa ndani), huku wengine wakisema kwamba anapaswa kujibu baada ya kumaliza kuswali.

They disagreed about responding to the salutation by the praying worshipper. A group of jurists, among whom are Sa Td ibn al-Musayyab, al-Hasan ibn al- c Hasan al-BasrT, and Qatada, permitted it. Another group disallowed responding in words, but permitted it with a gesture, and this is the opinion of Malik and aI-Shafi T. Others c prohibited responding by words or by gesture, and this is the opinion of Nu(mam. One group permitted an inward (silent) response, while others said that he should respond when he has finished praying.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na swali la iwapo kujibu salamu ni aina ya usemi wakati wa sala, jambo ambalo ni marufuku. Wale walioshikilia kuwa ni aina ya usemi uliokatazwa katika sala, na wakalifunga agizo la aya, "Na mnapoamkiwa kwa salamu, basi amkieni kwa salamu iliyo bora kuliko hiyo au irudisheni hiyo hiyo"148, pamoja na hadithi zinazokataza usemi wakati wa sala, walisema kuwa haijuzu kujibu wakati wa sala. Wale walioshikilia kuwa haimo katika usemi uliokatazwa, na wale waliofunga hadithi zinazokataza na agizo la kujibu salamu, waliruhusu kujibu wakati wa sala. Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir amesema kuwa wale wanaosema kwamba salamu haijibiwi kabisa wamepingana na sunna, kwa sababu Habib ameripoti kwamba Mtume ﷺ alijibu salamu kwa ishara, kwa wale waliomsalimia alipokuwa akisali.

The reason for their disagreement stems from whether the response to a salutation is a kind of speech during prayer, which is proscribed. Those who maintained that it is a kind of speech prohibited in prayers, and restricted the verse, “When ye are greeted with a greeting, greet ye with a better than it or return it”148 with traditions proscribing speech during .prayer, said that it is not permitted to respond during prayer. Those who maintained that it is not included in the prohibited speech, and those who restricted the proscribing traditions with the command for responding to a greeting, permitted a response during prayer. Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir has said that those who say that the greeting is not to be responded to at all have opposed the sunna, for Habib has reported that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) returned the greeting, with a gesture, of those who greeted him while he was praying.

Mjadala katika sura hii unahusu kutambua mtu ambaye qadhaa (kulipa swaumu zilizokosekana) ni wajibu juu yake, maelezo ya aina za qadhaa, na masharti yake.

The discussion in this chapter covers the identification of the person for whom qaddW is obligatory, the description of the types of qadd, and its conditions.

Wanachuoni wa Kiislamu walikubaliana kwamba mtu ambaye qadhaa ni wajibu kwake ni yule anayesahau (kuswali) au aliyelala hadi muda ukapita. Walitofautiana kuhusu hali ya yule anayechelewesha swala kwa makusudi, na kuhusu yule aliyezimia. Wanachuoni wa Kiislamu walikubaliana juu ya wajibu wa qadhaa kwa mtu anayekosa swala kwa sababu ya kusahau au kulala, kutokana na riwaya sahihi kuhusu maneno na vitendo vya Mtume ﷺ. Ninaposema maneno yake, namaanisha kauli yake: "Kalamu imeinuliwa kwa mambo matatu," na hapa alitaja aliyelala. Pia kauli yake: "Ikiwa mmoja wenu amelala wakati wa swala au ameisahau, basi aitekeleze atakapokumbuka." Pia imepokewa kwamba yeye mwenyewe mara moja alilala hadi jua likachomoza, kisha akaiswali kama qadhaa. Kuhusu mtu anayepuuza swala kwa makusudi hadi muda wake ukapita, wengi wanashikilia kwamba ni mwenye dhambi na qadhaa ni wajibu kwake. Baadhi ya wanachuoni wa Kizahiri wameshikilia kwamba ni mwenye dhambi, lakini hafai kuitekeleza qadhaa. Mmoja wa wanachuoni wa Kizahiri waliosema hivi alikuwa Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm.

The Muslim jurists agreed that the person for whom qadd is obligatory is one who forgets (to pray) or is asleep (till the expiry of the time). They disagreed about the case of one who delays praying intentionally and about one who faints. The Muslim jurists agreed about the obligation of qadd for a person who misses prayer due to forgetfulness or sleep, because of the authentic reports about the words and acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). By his words I mean the saying, “The Pen has been lifted on three counts”, and here he mentioned one sleeping, and also his saying, “If one of you slept through [the time of] prayer or forgot it, then let him make up for it when he remembers”. It is also reported that he himself overslept once till sunrise and then offered it as qadd' About the person who intentionally neglects prayer till its time is over, the majority hold that he is a sinner and qadd is obligatory on him. Some of the Zahirites have held that he is a sinner, but he is not to observe qadd. One of the Zahirites who held this was Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao ni mzozo wao juu ya mambo mawili. La kwanza ni kuruhusiwa kutumia qiyas (kulinganisha kisheria) katika sheria. La pili ni namna ya kujenga qiyas kwa mtu anayeacha swala kwa makusudi kulinganishwa na mtu aliyesahau, baada ya kukubaliwa uhalali wa qiyas. Wale waliofanya qadhā kuwa wajibu juu yake walisema kwamba ikiwa qadhā imewekwa juu ya mtu aliyesahau, ambaye sheria imemsamehe katika hali nyingi, inafaa iwe wajibu pia kwa mtu anayeiacha kwa makusudi asiye na udhuru. Wale ambao hawakuruhusu kulinganisha mtu aliyesahau na mtu anayeacha kwa makusudi walisema kwamba mtu aliyesahau na mtu anayeacha kwa makusudi ni vinyume, na qiyas haiwezi kufanywa kwa vinyume, kwa kuwa hukumu za vinyume ni tofauti, na kwamba qiyas hufanywa kwa mambo yanayofanana. Ukweli katika jambo hili ni kwamba, ikiwa wajibu (wa qadhā) unachukuliwa kuwa ni adhabu iliyozidishwa, basi qiyas ni sahihi kwa umbo lake. Lakini ikiwa unachukuliwa kuwa ni huruma kwa mtu aliyesahau, kwa kuwa ana udhuru, na faida hii haipaswi kunyimwa, basi mtu anayeacha kwa makusudi ni kinyume cha mtu aliyesahau, na qiyas haijengwi, kwa sababu mtu aliyesahau ana udhuru, ilhali anayeacha kwa makusudi hana. Kanuni ni kwamba qadhā si wajibu kwa sababu ya amri ya adā' (kutekeleza kwa wakati), bali kwa amri mpya, kama wanavyoshikilia Mutakallimūn. Kwa kuwa mtu aliyesahau amekosa moja ya sharti zinazomwezesha kutekeleza kitendo kwa usahihi, nalo ni wakati, ambao ni miongoni mwa sharti za usahihi, na kuchelewa kwa wakati ni, kwa qiyas, ruhusa kwake. Hata hivyo, kuna hadithi inayoamua kesi ya waliosahau na waliolala; kesi ya anayeacha kwa makusudi inayumba kati ya kufanana na kesi zao na kutofanana nazo. Ni Mwenyezi Mungu anayeongoza kwenye haki.

Walitofautiana kuhusu mpangilio (wa kuswali), yaani walitofautiana kuhusu wajibu wa kuzingatia mpangilio kati ya swala zilizosahauliwa, na kati yake na swala ya sasa (adaa). Malik alishikilia kwamba kuzingatia mpangilio wa mfuatano ni wajibu kwa swala tano au chache kuliko hizo, na kwamba mtu anapaswa kuanza na swala aliyosahau hata kama wakati wa swala ya sasa utapita. Alienda mbali hadi kusema kwamba ikiwa amejishughulisha na swala ya sasa kisha akakumbuka swala iliyosahauliwa, swala ya sasa inabatilika kwake. Maoni kama hayo yalitolewa na Abu Hanifa na al-Thawri, isipokuwa kwamba wao walishikilia wajibu wa mpangilio wa mfuatano pale tu muda wa swala ya sasa unapokuwa wa kutosha (kwa swala ya qadhaa na swala ya adaa). Wanazuoni hawa walikubaliana kwamba wajibu wa mpangilio unaondoka katika hali ya kusahau. Al-Shafi'i alisema kwamba hakuna wajibu wa kuzingatia mpangilio, lakini mtu akifanya hivyo na muda ukitosha kwa swala ya sasa, ni jambo linalopendeza.

They differed over the order (of offering prayers), that is, they disagreed about the obligation of observing an order among the forgotten prayers, and between them and the add prayer. Malik maintained that observing a sequential order is obligatory for five prayers or whatever is less, and that the person is to begin with a forgotten prayer even if the time of the current prayer is to be missed. He went as far as saying that if he is occupied with the current prayer and remembers a forgotten prayer, the current prayer is invalidated for him. Similar views were expressed by Abu HanTfa and al-ThawrT, except that they upheld the obligation of a sequential order only when the period for the current prayer is long enough (for the qadd and the add prayers). These jurists agreed about the dropping of the obligation of order in the case of forgetfulness. Al-Shafi T said c that there is no obligation of maintaining an order, but if he does this and the time is long enough to accommodate the current prayer, it is commendable.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na mgongano wa hadith kuhusu suala hili, na pia na tofauti yao kuhusu kuwepo kwa mfanano kati ya qadd na adaa. Kuna hadith mbili zinazopingana kuhusu suala hili. Ya kwanza ni ile inayosimuliwa kutoka kwa Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake ﷺ) kwamba alisema: "Mtu ambaye amesahau sala [na akakumbuka] wakati anasali sala nyingine pamoja na imamu, aendelee na imamu. Baada ya kumaliza sala hiyo, arudie sala aliyoisahau kisha arudie sala aliyoisali pamoja na imamu." Wafuasi wa al-Shafi'i wanaona hadith hii kuwa dhaifu, huku wakiithibitisha hadith ya Ibn 'Abbas kwamba Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake ﷺ) alisema: "Ikiwa mmoja wenu amesahau sala na akakumbuka wakati anasali sala nyingine iliyoamriwa, basi amalize sala anayoisali, kisha akishamaliza, aswali kama qadd sala aliyoisahau." Hata hivyo, hadith sahihi zaidi katika suala hili ni ile iliyotangulia, ambapo maneno ya Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake ﷺ) ni: "Ikiwa mmoja wenu amelala wakati wa sala au ameisahau, basi aswali sala hiyo atakapokumbuka."

Swali la wakati gani rakaa inachukuliwa kuwa imepotea linahusisha masuala mawili. Kwanza, pale mswali anapojiunga na sala wakati imamu ameshainama kwa ajili ya ruku‘, na pili, pale anaposwali pamoja na imamu kisha akasahau kumfuata katika ruku‘, au kunapotokea msukumano wa aina fulani unaomzuia kufanya hivyo.

The question as to when a rak^a is deemed to be lost entails two issues. First, when the worshipper joins in when the imam has bent for the ruku\ and second, when he is praying with the imam and forgets to follow him in the ruk# or something in the nature of jostling occurs that prevents him from- doing so.

There are three opinions on this issue. The first, which is held by the majority, is that if he can catch up with the imam before he raises his head from the ruk# and is able to bow with him, then he has caught the rakfa and there is no qadd* for him. These jurists differed on whether it is a condition for this person joining in that he pronounce two takbirs, the initial takbir and one for the ruk&, or whether the takbir of the ruk& is sufficient for him, and if it is deemed compensated, is it a condition for it that he intends through it the initial takbir also? Some of them said that a single takbir would be sufficient if he includes in it the intention of the initial takbir. This is the opinion of Malik and al-Shafi'i, but the preference in their view is for two takbirs. A group of jurists said that (pronouncing) two takbirs is necessary. Another group said that one is sufficient even if he does not intend the initial takbir through it.

There are three opinions on this issue. The first, which is held by the majority, is that if he can catch up with the imam before he raises his head from the ruk# and is able to bow with him, then, he has caught the rakfa and there is no qadd* for him. These jurists differed on whether it is a condition for This person joining in that he pronounce two takbirs., the initial takbir and one for the or is the takbir of the ruk& to be sufficient for him, and if it is deemed compensated, is it a condition for it that he intends through it the initial takbir also? Some of them said that a single takbir would be sufficient if he includes in it the intention of the initial takbir. This is the opinion of Malik and al-ShafiT but, the preference in their view is for two takbirs. A. group of jurists said that (pronouncing) two takbirs is necessary. Another group said that one is sufficient even if he does not intend the initial takbir through it.

Maoni ya pili ni kwamba ikiwa imamu ameingia katika rukuu, mtu huyo amekosa raka'a, na hawezi kuipata isipokuwa alifanya hivyo baada ya kusimama pamoja na imamu. Hii inanasibishwa kwa Abu Hurayra. Maoni ya tatu ni kwamba ikiwa mtu anakaribia safu ya mwisho wakati imamu ameinua kichwa chake kutoka rukuu, lakini baadhi ya walio katika safu hiyo bado hawajainua, na yeye akajiunga nao katika rukuu, amepata raka'a, kwa sababu wengine wanawaongoza wengine. Maoni haya yalipendekezwa na al-Sha'bi. Sababu ya kutofautiana huku inatokana na kuyumba kwa maana ya neno raka'a kati ya kitendo cha kuinama peke yake, na maana iliyojumuishwa ya kuinama na kusimama pamoja. Mtume (rehema na amani za Allah ziwe juu yake) amesema: "Aliyepata raka'a moja ya sala amepata sala." Ibn al-Mundhir amesema kwamba hadithi hii imethibitishwa kuwa sahihi kutoka kwa Mjumbe wa Allah (rehema na amani za Allah ziwe juu yake). Wale ambao neno raka'a lilitumika kwao kumaanisha kuinama na kusimama pamoja walisema kwamba ikiwa mtu amekosa msimamo wa kusimama pamoja na imamu, amepoteza raka'a. Wale ambao neno raka'a lilitumika kwao kumaanisha kuinama lenyewe waliona kwamba kupata kuinama ni kupata raka'a. Utata (ishtiraak) unaopatikana katika neno hili ni kuyumba kwake kati ya maana ya kileksika na maana ya kitaalamu, kwani neno kwa maana yake ya kileksika linahusu kuinama peke yake, lakini kwa maana yake ya kitaalamu linahusu kusimama, kuinama, na kusujudu. Wale waliosema kwamba neno raka'a katika maneno ya Mtume (rehema na amani za Allah ziwe juu yake), "Aliyepata raka'a," linahusu maana ya kitaalamu, pia hawakukubali maoni ya wale wanaokubali sehemu ya kile kinachoonyeshwa na majina, walisema kwamba ni lazima mtu atekeleze vitendo vyote vitatu pamoja na imamu, yaani kusimama, kuinama, na kusujudu. Inawezekana kwamba wale waliokuwa wakiona kuwa rukuu ni sehemu walizingatia tu sehemu kubwa inayoonyeshwa na neno hilo, kwani mtu aliyeweza kushiriki katika rukuu amepata sehemu mbili, wakati mtu aliyekosa rukuu amepata sehemu moja tu. Kwa msingi huu, tofauti yao inahusu mjadala kuhusu kukubali sehemu ya kile kinachoashiriwa na neno, au maana yote ya neno hilo. Inawezekana pia kupata tofauti za maoni kwa pande zote mbili.

Kuhusu mtu aliyesahau kumfuata imamu katika rukuu mpaka imamu akasujudu, kundi moja la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilisema kwamba ikiwa amekosa kurukuu pamoja naye, amepoteza rakaa hiyo, na ni wajibu kwake kuitekeleza kama qadhaa (kabla ya kutoa salamu yake mwenyewe). Kundi jingine la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilisema kwamba anaweza kuhesabu rakaa hiyo kuwa ameiswali ikiwa inawezekana kwake kukamilisha sujudu kabla imamu hajaanza rakaa inayofuata. Kundi la tatu la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilisema kwamba anapaswa kumfuata imamu na kuhesabu rakaa hiyo kuwa ameiswali mradi imamu hajainua kichwa chake baada ya kurukuu katika rakaa ya pili. Tofauti hii ipo miongoni mwa wafuasi wa Malik, na kuna mabishano makubwa kuhusu maelezo, pamoja na tofauti miongoni mwao kuhusu kama kilichokosekana kilitokea kwa kusahau au kwa msongamano, na kama kilitokea katika swala ya Ijumaa au swala nyingine, na kama hali hii ilimkumba mfuasi katika rakaa ya kwanza au katika rakaa nyingine.

About the person forgetting to follow the imam in rukuc till the imam prostrates, a group of jurists said that if he has failed to observe the rukuz with him, he has lost the rak'a and it is obligatory for him to offer it as qada? (before his own salam). Another group of jurists said that he can count the rakfa (as performed) if it is possible for him to complete the fukuS before the imam has commenced the next rak'a. A third group of jurists said that he is to follow him and count the rakfa as performed as long as the imam has not raised his head after bowing in the second rak^a. This disagreement exists among the disciples of Malik, and there is considerable dispute over details, along with disagreements among them relating to whether what was missed occurred due to forgetfulness or due to jostling, and whether it happened in a jumu^a prayer or another, and whether this situation was faced by the follower in the first rakfa or in another rak'a.

Kwa kuwa lengo letu si kurekodi maelezo ya maoni au kuyatoa hukumu zake, bali ni kuashiria masuala ya msingi na kanuni zake za msingi, tunasema yafuatayo:

Since our purpose is not to record the details of the opinions or to derive them, but only to indicate the fundamental issues and their (underlying) principles, we say the following:

Sababu ya kutofautiana katika suala hili ni mzozo kuhusu kama ni sharti kwa vitendo vya mfuasi kwamba viende sambamba na (au vifuate mara moja) vya imamu, na kama sharti hili linahusu vitendo vyote vitatu vinavyounda rak'a, yaani kusimama, kuinama na kusujudu, au ni sharti kwa baadhi tu kati yake. Zaidi ya hayo, je, kitendo chake huenda kinyume naye iwapo kitendo hicho hakifuati (mara moja) kitendo cha imamu, yaani pale anapofanya kitendo kimoja na imamu anafanya kinachofuata? Wale waliosema kwamba ni sharti kwa kila kitendo cha rak'a moja, yaani kitendo cha mfuasi kiwe sambamba na kitendo hicho hicho cha imamu, kwani la sivyo itakuwa ni kujitenga na imamu, na Nabii ﷺ amesema: "Imamu amewekwa ili afuatwe, basi msipingane naye," walisema kwamba iwapo atashindwa kuungana na imamu katika rukuu hata kwa sehemu ndogo yake, atakuwa amekosa rak'a hiyo. Wale waliozingatia sehemu tu ya kitendo hicho walisema kwamba anapata rak'a iwapo atapata sehemu ya rak'a kabla imamu hajainuka kwa rak'a inayofuata, na hili halimaanishi kwenda kinyume naye. Iwapo imamu ameshainuka kwenda rak'a ya pili na mfuasi bado anamfuata katika vitendo vya rak'a ya kwanza, basi hili linamaanisha kwenda kinyume naye katika rak'a ya kwanza. Wale waliosema kwamba anaweza kuendelea na vitendo vyake mradi imamu hajainama katika rak'a inayofuata, walikuwa na maoni kwamba si sharti kila sehemu ya kitendo cha mfuasi iendane na kila sehemu ya kitendo cha imamu, wala kwa ujumla wake, bali sharti ni kwamba kitendo hicho kitokee baada yake. Walikubaliana kwamba ikiwa imamu ameinuka baada ya kurukuu katika rak'a ya pili, basi mfuasi hahesabu rak'a hiyo kuwa imetekelezwa, ikiwa amekuwa akiendelea na vitendo vyake ndani yake, kwa kuwa vitendo hivyo vingepewa hukmu ya rak'a ya kwanza, wakati imamu yuko chini ya hukmu ya rak'a ya pili, na hili kwa dhahiri ni kwenda kinyume naye.

Suala la pili kati ya masuala matatu ya msingi yanayotumika kama kanuni za mada hii ni kama utekelezaji wa sehemu ya sala aliyoikosa mfuasi, kutoka sala ya imamu, unahesabika kuwa ni "add" au "qadd". Kuna maoni matatu kuhusu suala hili.

The second of the three fundamental issues that act as principles of the topic is whether the performance by the follower of the part of the prayer he has missed, from the imam's prayer, amounts to add or qadd. There are three opinions on this issue.

Kundi ya wanachuoni wamesema kwamba sehemu anayoiswali baada ya salamu ya imamu ni qadd, na kile alichokiswali pamoja na imamu si sehemu ya kwanza ya swala yake. Kundi jingine likasema kwamba kile anachoswali baada ya salamu ya imamu ni add, na kile alichokiswali pamoja na imamu ndicho sehemu ya kwanza ya swala yake. Kundi la tatu likatofautisha kati ya maneno na vitendo, likasema kwamba anatekeleza maneno kama qadd, yaani kisomo, kisha anaendelea na vitendo, yaani kwa njia hiyo ni add. Kwa hiyo, kulingana na maoni ya kwanza, yanayoona sehemu iliyokosekana anayoitekeleza mfuasi kuwa ni qadd, mtu anayeweza kupata rak'a moja ya swala ya maghrib atasimama imamu atakapomaliza swala yake kwa salamu, na ataswali rak'a mbili, akisoma Ummul-Qur'an na sura nyingine katika kila moja yao, bila kukaa kati ya hizo mbili. Kulingana na maoni ya pili, yanayotegemea kuendelea, atasimama kwa rak'a moja, akisoma humo Ummul-Qur'an na sura nyingine, kisha atakaa, baada ya hapo atasimama kwa rak'a nyingine na kusoma humo Ummul-Qur'an pekee. Kulingana na maoni ya tatu, atasimama kwa rak'a moja, akisoma humo Ummul-Qur'an na sura nyingine, kisha atakaa, baada ya hapo atasimama kwa rak'a ya pili pia akisoma humo Ummul-Qur'an na sura nyingine.

A group of jurists said that the part he observes after the imam's salutation is qadd and what he has observed with the imam is not the first part of his prayer. Another group said that what he observes after the salutation of the imam is add and what he observed with the imam is the first part of his prayer. A third group made a distinction between words and acts and said that he performs the words as qaddy that is, the recitation, and continues on with the acts, meaning add thereby. Thus, according to the first opinion, the opinion which regards the missed part that the follower performs as qadd, the person who is able to catch one rak^a of the maghrib prayer will stand up when the imam ends his prayer with the salutation and offer two rak'as reciting the umm al-Qur'an and another sura in each one of them, without adopting the sitting posture in between the two. In accordance with the second opinion, that is based on continuation, he will stand up for one rak^a reciting in it the umm al-Qir'dn and another sura and then adopt the sitting posture, after which he will rise for another rak^a and recite in it only the umm al- QuPan. In accordance with the third opinion, he will stand up for a rak'a reciting in it the umm al-Qur'dn and another sura and then take the sitting posture, after which he will rise for the second rak*u also reciting in it the umm al-Qur>dn and another sura.

Kikundi cha wanazuoni wa fiqhi kilisema kwamba ikiwa mtu ataweza kupata rakaa moja ya swala ya Ijumaa, basi amekwisha kutekeleza swala ya Ijumaa, na atatakiwa kuswali rakaa ya pili baada ya salamu ya imamu, lakini. Ikiwa atapata chini ya rakaa moja, atatakiwa kuswali rakaa nne kama swala ya Adhuhuri. Hii ndiyo maoni ya Malik na al-Shafi'i. Kikundi kingine cha wanazuoni wa fiqhi kilisema kwamba atatakiwa kukamilisha rakaa mbili, bila kujali kile alichoweza kupata cha swala pamoja na imamu. Hii ni maoni ya Abu Hanifa. Sababu ya kutofautiana katika jambo hili inatokana na kile kinachodhaniwa kuwa mgongano kati ya maana ya jumla ya maneno ya Mtume ﷺ, "Swali kile mnachoweza kupata (nyuma ya imamu), na kamilisheni kile mlichokosa", na maana ya maneno yake, "Aliyepata rakaa ya swala (nyuma ya imamu) amepata swala". Wale waliofanya uamuzi kwa kuzingatia maneno, "kamilisheni kile mlichokosa", walilazimisha kwamba mfuasi aswali rakaa mbili hata kama amepata (kidogo) chini ya rakaa mbili. Wale ambao katika maneno ya Mtume ﷺ, "amepata swala", kuna neno lililodokezwa, yaani, amepata hukmu ya swala, walisema kwamba dalili ya maandishi (dalil al-khitab) inaonyesha kwamba aliyepata chini ya rakaa moja hajapata hukmu ya swala. Hata hivyo, neno lililodokezwa katika andiko hili lina uwezekano mwingi, kwani inawezekana likamaanisha fadhila ya swala, inawezekana likamaanisha wakati wa swala, na pia inawezekana likamaanisha hukmu ya swala. Huenda maana inayowezekana katika mojawapo ya hizi isiwe dhahiri zaidi kuliko nyingine. Ikiwa ni hivyo, basi jambo hili linaingia katika kundi la mujmal (maana isiyofafanuliwa), ambalo halidokezi hukmu, na andiko lenye maana ya jumla linakuwa na nguvu zaidi. Lakini, ikiwa tutakubali kwamba jambo hilo liko wazi katika mojawapo ya maana hizi zilizodokezwa, kwa mfano hukmu ya sala kulingana na maoni1 ya wale wanaoshikilia hili, basi maana hii iliyo wazi haipingani na maana ya jumla (katika andiko lingine), isipokuwa ikichukuliwa kama aina ya dalili ya andiko (rfa/f/ al-khitab). Lakini maana ya jumla ina nguvu zaidi, kwa makubaliano ya wote, kuliko dalili ya andiko, hasa dalili inayotegemea uwezekano kadhaa au maana iliyo wazi. Kwa upande mwingine, maoni ya wale wanaodai kwamba maneno ya Mtume ﷺ, "amepata rakaa ya sala", yanajumuisha maana zote zilizodokezwa ni dhaifu na hayajulikani katika matumizi ya lugha ya Kiarabu, isipokuwa ikidaiwa kwamba kuna maana ya kimila au ya kitaalamu kama hiyo.

A group of jurists said that if he is able to catch a rak'a of jumu^a then he has observed the jumu^a prayer, and he is to perform the second rak'a after the salutation of the imam, but. if he catches less than a rak^a he is to pray the four rak'as as zuhr. This is the opinion of Malik and al-ShafiT. Another group of jurists said that he is to complete two rakfas irrespective of what he has been able to catch of the prayer with the imam. This is Abu HanTfa’s opinion. The reason for disagreement in this matter stems from what is supposed to be a conflict between the general implication of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Pray what you are able to catch (behind the imam), and complete what you have missed”, and the meaning of his words, “He who has caught a raV-a of a prayer (behind the imam) has caught the prayer”. Those who decided on the basis of the words, “complete what you have missed”, made it obligatory that the follower pray two vak'as even if he has been able to catch (a little) less than two rak^as. Those for whom there is an implied word in the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “he has caught the prayer”, that is, he has caught the hukm of the prayer, said that the (indirect) indication of the text (dalil al- khiidb) implies that one who has caught less than one rak^a has not caught the hukm of the prayer. The implied word, however, in this text has multiple possibilities, for it is possible that it means the merit of the prayer, it is possible that it means the time of the prayer, and it is also possible that it means the hukm of the prayer. Perhaps the possible meaning in one of these is not more obvious than the other. If this is the case, then it belongs to the category of mujmal (unelaborated implication), which does not imply a hukm, and the other (text with a) general meaning becomes preferable. If, however, we concede that it is obvious in one of these implied meanings, for example, the hukm of the prayer in accordance with the opinion1 of those who hold this, then, this obvious meaning is not in conflict with the general meaning (in the other text), unless it is treated as a category of the indication of the text (rfa/f/ al-khitab), but the general meaning is stronger, unanimously, than the indication of the text, especially an indication based on several probabilities or on the obvious meaning. On the other hand, the opinion of those who maintain that the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “he has caught the prayer”, include all the implied meanings, is weak and unknown in Arab usage, unless it is maintained that there is such a customary or technical meaning.

Kuhusu suala la mfuasi kumfuata imamu katika sujuda, yaani sujuda za kusahau, kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilifanya msingi kuwa ni rak'a moja, yaani, kwamba ashike angalau rak'a moja pamoja na imamu. Kundi jingine la wanazuoni wa fiqhi halikuzingatia jambo hilo. Wale ambao hawakuzingatia jambo hilo waliamua kwa kuzingatia maana ya jumla ya maneno ya Mtume ﷺ: "Imamu ameteuliwa ili afuatwe." Wale waliozingatia rak'a waliamua kulingana na maana ya maneno ya Mtume ﷺ: "Amepata sala." Ni kwa sababu hii ndiyo maana walitofautiana pia katika suala dogo la tatu.

On the issue of the follower following the imam in prostrations, that is, the prostrations of forgetfulness, a group of jurists fixed one rak'a as the basis, that is, that he should catch at least a rak'a with the imam', another group of jurists did not take this into account. Those who did not take this into account decided on the basis of the general implication of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “The imam has been appointed so that he be followed”. Those who took the rak'a into account decided according to the meaning of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “He has caught the prayer”. It is for this reason that they also differed on the third sub-issue.

Kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilisema kwamba ikiwa msafiri atapata chini ya rakaa moja ya sala ya imamu (aliye) katika makazi, hatalazimika kukamilisha sehemu iliyobaki ya sala kama mtu aliye na hadhi ya mkazi; lakini ikiwa atapata rakaa moja, kukamilisha sala kunakuwa wajibu kwake.

A group of jurists said that if the traveller catches less than one rak'a of the prayer of the imam (who is) in a settlement he is not to complete the rest of the prayer as one having the status of the resident, but if he catches one rakfa completion is binding upon him.

Hili, basi, ni hukmu ya qadd* kwa sehemu ya sala pale imamu alipoanza sala kabla ya mfuasi.

This, then, is the hukm of qadd* for part of the prayer when the imam had started prayer before the follower.

Majaji walikubaliana kuhusu hukmu ya kulipa (qadhaa) kwa sehemu ya sala inayotokea kwa sababu ya kusahau kwa imamu au kwa mtu binafsi (anayeswali peke yake), kwamba yeye atalazimika kulipa kila kitu kilicho nguzo (rukni) ya sala, yaani wajibu, na sala yake haisihi bila kukitekeleza. Hata hivyo, kuna masuala ambayo walitofautiana juu yake: baadhi walifanya kulipa kuwa wajibu ndani yake, na wengine wakaweka lazima ya kurudia sala, kama katika kesi ya mtu aliyesahau kufanya sujud nne katika rakaa nne, akikosa sujud moja katika kila rakaa. Kundi moja la majaji lilisema kwamba anarekebisha ya nne kwa kusujudu, na kuzihesabu rakaa zilizotangulia kuwa zimebatilika, kisha anazirudia. Hii ni maoni ya Malik. Kundi jingine la majaji lilisema kwamba sala yote inabatilika na kurudia kunakuwa wajibu juu yake. Hii ni moja ya riwaya kutoka kwa Ahmad. Kundi la tatu lilisema kwamba yeye hufanya sujud nne mfululizo na sala yake inasimama kuwa imekamilika. Hili lilishikiliwa na Abu Hanifa, al-Thawri, na al-Awza'i. Kundi la nne lilisema kwamba ya nne inarekebishwa kwa sujud mbili. Hii ni maoni ya al-Shafi'i.

The jurists agreed with respect to the hukm of qadffi for part of the prayer that occurs because of the forgetfulness of the imam or of the individual (praying independently), that he is to observe as qadd> whatever is an essential element (rukn) of the prayer, that is, an obligation, and it is not valid for him unless he performs this (part). There are, however, issues in it over which they disagreed, with some making qada> (making up the missing parts) obligatory in them and the others imposing repetition, as in the case of the person who forgets to make four prostrations in four rakfasy missing one prostration in each rak'a. K group of jurists, thus, said that he rectifies the fourth by the prostrating and deems the earlier rak'as as nullified and then repeats them. This is Malik’s opinion. Another group of jurists said that the prayer is nullified as a whole and repetition becomes binding upon him. This is one of the narrations from Ahmad. A third group said that he performs four consecutive prostrations and his prayer stands completed. This was held by Abu HanTfa, al-Thawri, and al-Awza T. A fourth group said that c the fourth is rectified with two prostrations. This is al-ShafiTs opinion.

Sujuda zilizopokelewa kisheria zinatumika katika mojawapo ya kesi mbili: kwanza, katika kuzidi au kupungua kwa vitendo au maneno bila kukusudia; na pili, katika kesi ya shaka katika vitendo vya sala. Kwa upande wa sujuda zinazotokana na kusahau, na si kwa sababu ya shaka, mjadala umegawanywa katika sehemu sita. Sehemu ya kwanza inahusu kubainisha hukmu ya sujuda. Ya pili inahusu sababu zake katika sala. Ya tatu inahusu kubainisha aina ya vitendo na vitendo wenyewe ambavyo kwa sababu yake sujuda hufanywa. Ya nne inahusu maelezo ya sujuda za kusahau. Ya tano inahusu kumtambua mtu ambaye kwake sujuda ni lazima. Ya sita inahusu njia ambayo mfuasi humtahadharisha imamu kuhusu kusahau kwake.

The prostrations transmitted in the law apply in one of two cases: first, in unintended excess or deficiency of acts or words; and second, in the case of doubt in the acts of the prayer. In the case of the prostrations resulting from forgetfulness, and not from doubt, the discussion is covered in six sections. The first section is about the identification of the hukm of the prostrations. The second is about their occasions in the prayer. The third relates to the identification of the species of the acts and the acts themselves because of which the prostrations are made. The fourth is about the description of the prostrations of forgetfulness. The fifth is about the identification of the person for whom the prostrations are obligatory. The sixth is about the means with which the follower alerts the imam about his forgetfulness.

Walitofautiana kuhusu sujuda za kusahau, je, ni wajibu au ni sunna. Al-Shafi'i alishikilia kwamba ni sunna, ilhali Abu Hanifa alishikilia kwamba ni wajibu, lakini kama moja ya masharti ya kusihi kwa sala. Malik alifanya tofauti kati ya sujuda za kusahau zinazosababishwa na kusahau maneno au kusahau baadhi ya vitendo, na pia zile zinazosababishwa na ziada au upungufu. Alisema kwamba sujuda za kusahau zinazofanywa kwa sababu ya vitendo vyenye upungufu ni za lazima, na kwa mujibu wake ni moja ya masharti ya kusihi kwa sala. Hii ndiyo riwaya inayojulikana. Pia imepokewa kutoka kwake kwamba sujuda kwa sababu ya upungufu ni za lazima, na sujuda kwa sababu ya ziada ni za kupendeza.

They disagreed about the prostrations of forgetfulness, whether they are an obligation or a sunna. Al-Shafi T held that c they are a sunna^ while Abu Harnfa held them to be an obligation, but as one of the conditions of the validity of prayer. Malik made a distinction between the prostrations of forgetfulness caused by forgetting words or forgetting some acts, and also those caused by an excess or a deficiency. He said that the prostrations of forgetfulness that are performed because of deficient acts are obligatory, and are, according to him, one of the conditions of the validity of prayer. This is the well-known report. It is also reported from him that prostrations on account of deficiency are obligatory and prostrations on account of excess are recommended.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na mzozo wao kuhusu ufafanuzi wa vitendo vya Mtume (rehema na amani za Mungu zimshukie) vinavyohusiana na mada hii, kama vinaonyesha wajibu au mapendekezo. Abu Hanifa alivifafanua vitendo vya Mtume (rehema na amani za Mungu zimshukie) kuwa ni vya lazima, kwani hiyo ndiyo kanuni katika mtazamo wake, kwa kuwa vinajitokeza kama ufafanuzi wa jambo la lazima. Mtume (rehema na amani za Mungu zimshukie) alisema, "Swali kama mnavyoniona ninavyoswali". Al-Shafi'i alivifafanua vitendo vyake kuwa vinaonyesha mapendekezo, na alijitenga na maana ya asili ya kanuni hiyo kwa msingi wa kulinganisha. Alishikilia kwamba, kwa mtazamo wa wengi, sujuda hazibadilishi jambo la lazima, bali ni mbadala wa kitendo kinachopendekezwa; kwa hiyo mbadala wa kitu kisicho cha lazima hauwezi kuwa wa lazima. Kwa Malik, vitendo vilipewa msisitizo mkubwa zaidi kuliko maneno, kwani ndivyo vinavyounda muundo wa swala zaidi ya maneno; yaani, wajibu unaohusiana na vitendo ni mwingi kuliko ule unaohusiana na maneno. Hivyo ilikuwa kama vile alishikilia kwamba vitendo vina msisitizo mkubwa zaidi kuliko maneno, ingawa sujuda za kusahau hubadilisha tu vitendo visivyo vya lazima. Tofauti yake kati ya sujuda zinazofanywa kwa sababu ya upungufu na zile zinazofanywa kwa sababu ya ziada, kulingana na riwaya ya pili, inatokana na ukweli kwamba sujuda za upungufu zimewekwa kama fidia kwa kile kilichoachwa katika vitendo vya swala, ilhali sujuda za ziada ni kama toba, si mbadala.

The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute about the interpretation of the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) related to this topic, whether they convey an obligation or recommenda­tion. Abu Hanifa interpreted the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) as obligatory, as that is the principle in his view, for they occur as an elaboration of an obligatory act. The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Pray as you see me praying”. Al-ShafiT interpreted his acts as conveying recommendation, and he deviated from the original meaning of the principle on the basis of analogy. He held that as prostrations, in the view of the majority, do not become a substitute for an obligation, but are a substitute for a recommended act; therefore, a substitute for something that is not obligatory cannot be obligatory. For Malik there was greater emphasis on the acts as compared to the words, for they form the structure for the prayer more than the words, I mean, the obligations that are related to acts are more than those related to words. Thus, it was as if he held that there is greater emphasis for the acts as compared to words, even though the prostrations of forgetfulness become a substitute only for acts that are not obligatory. His distinction between prostrations made on account of deficiency and those made for excess, in accordance with the second narration, is based on the fact that the prostrations on account of deficiency are stipulated as compensation for what is dropped from the acts of the prayer, while prostrations on account of excess are like a repentance not a substitute.

Walikuwa wametofautiana kuhusu (wakati) ambapo sujuda ya kusahau inapaswa kufanywa; kulikuwa na maoni matano. Washafi'i walishikilia kwamba sababu ya sujuda za kusahau daima ni kabla ya salamu. Wahanafi walisema kwamba sababu yake daima ni baada ya salamu. Wamaliki walitoa tofauti, wakisema kwamba ikiwa sujuda ni kwa sababu ya upungufu, sababu yake ni kabla ya salamu, lakini ikiwa ni kwa sababu ya ziada, sababu yake ni baada ya salamu. Ahmad ibn Hanbal alisema kwamba sujuda hufanywa kabla ya salamu kwa matukio ambayo Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisujudu kabla ya salamu, na hufanywa baada ya salamu kwa matukio ambayo Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisujudu baada ya salamu. Kwa matukio yasiyo ya haya, sujuda daima ni kabla ya salamu. Wazahiri walisema kwamba sujuda zinapaswa kufanywa tu kwa matukio matano ambayo Mtume wa Allah ﷺ aliyafanyia sujuda. Zaidi ya kesi hizi, ikiwa kuacha kulikuwa kwa jambo la wajibu, mtu analazimika kuzifanya, lakini ikiwa ni mambo ya sunna, mtu hana wajibu wowote.

They disagreed about (the time) when the prostration of forgetfulness is to be made; there were five opinions. The ShafFites held that the occasion for the prostrations of forgetfulness is always immediately before the salutation. The Hanafites maintained that the occasion for them is always after the salutation. The.Malikites made a distinction saying that if the prostrations are on account of a deficiency their occasion is before the salutation, but if they are on account of excess their occasion is after the salutation. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that the prostrations are made before the salutation for the occasions on which the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prostrated before the salutation and they are made after the salutation for occasions on which the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prostrated after the salutation. Those that are besides these occasions for them the prostrations are always before the salutation. The Zahirites said that the prostrations are to be made only for the five occasions on which the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) made them. Besides these cases, if the omission was for something obligatory he has to make them, but if they are recommended the person is under no obligation.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na ukweli uliothibitishwa kwamba Nabii ﷺ alisujudu wakati mwingine kabla ya salamu na wakati mwingine baada yake. Hivyo, imethibitishwa kutoka kwa Hadithi ya Buhayna, aliyesema: "Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ alituongoza katika kuswali rakaa mbili, kisha akasimama, bila kukaa kwenye nafasi ya kukaa, na watu wakasimama pamoja naye. Alipomaliza swala, alisujudu sujuda mbili akiwa bado ameketi." Pia imethibitishwa kutoka kwa Hadithi ya Dhu al-Yadayn, iliyotangulia, ambapo alitoa salamu baada ya rakaa mbili. Wale waliokubali kutumia kiasi (qiyas) katika sujuda za kusahau, yaani, waliopanua hukumu ya zile hali ambazo Nabii ﷺ alisujudu hadi kwenye hali zinazofanana nazo katika Hadithi hizi sahihi, walikuwa na maoni matatu tofauti. La kwanza linatokana na njia ya kuchagua kilicho bora (tarjih), la pili linatokana na njia ya kupatanisha (jam'), na la tatu linatokana na njia ya kupatanisha kati ya kuchagua kilicho bora na kupatanisha kwa asili yake.

Wale wanaoshikilia sujud za kusahau, iwe ni kwa ziada au upungufu unaoweza kutokea katika swala kwa sababu ya kusahau, wamekubaliana kwamba sujud hizo zinatokana na (kuacha) sunna za swala, si nguzo za swala wala mambo yanayopendeza (raghaib) ambayo ni pungufu ya sunna. Kwa mtazamo wao, hakuna wajibu wa kulipa kwa kuacha kundi hili, yaani, ikiwa mtu atasahau mojawapo katika swala, isipokuwa likitokea zaidi ya mara moja. Kwa mfano, Malik ana mtazamo kwamba hakuna wajibu wa sujud kwa kusahau takbira moja, lakini kuna sujud kwa kuacha zaidi ya tendo moja la kundi hili. Haiwezekani swala kuwa sahihi kwa kuacha wajibu. Ni lazima yatekelezwe na kufanywa. Matokeo ya kuyasahau ni kurudia swala nzima, kama ilivyotangulia katika mjadala wa mambo yanayopelekea kurudia na yanayopelekea kuacha, yaani, kama mtu anayeweza kuacha mojawapo ya vipengele vya swala.

The upholders of the prostrations of forgetfulness, whether for excess or deficiency that may occur in the prayer by way of forgetfulness, agreed that the prostrations are on account of (omission of) the sunan of the prayer and not the obligations nor on account of the desirable acts (ragh&ib) (lesser than sunan). There is no liability in their view for omission of this category, that is, if the person forgets one of them in prayer, unless they happen more than once. For example, Malik is of the view that there is no obligation for prostrations on account of forgetting a single takbir, but there is a prostration for leaving out more than one act of this category. There can be no validity with the omission of obligations. They are to be performed and undertaken. The consequence of forgetting them is the repetition of the prayer as a whole, as has preceded in the discussion of what leads to repetition and what leads to qadd>, I mean, like a person who may relinquish one of the constituent elements of prayer.

Sujūd za kusahau kwa sababu ya ziada, kwa upande mwingine, hutokea kutokana na ziada katika faradhi pamoja na sunnah. Katika kauli hii, hakuna mgogoro miongoni mwao; wanatofautiana tu kwa msingi wa mgogoro wao kuhusu vitendo gani ni faradhi na gani si faradhi, gani ni sunnah na gani si sunnah, na lipi ni sunnah na lipi ni jambo linalopendeza (raghiba). Mfano wake ni qunut. Kwa mujibu wa Malik, mtu haruhusiwi kufanya sujūd kwa sababu ya kuacha qunut kwa kuwa ni jambo linalopendeza tu (mustahabb) (chini ya sunnah) kwa mtazamo wake, lakini anapaswa kufanya sujūd kulingana na al-Shafi'i kwa kuwa ni sunnah kwa mtazamo wake.

The prostrations of forgetfulness on account of an excess, on the other hand, occur due to an excess in the obligations as well as the sunan. In this statement, there is no dispute among them; they disagree only on the basis of their dispute as to what acts are obligations and what are not, what are sunan and what are not, and what is a sunna and what is a desirable act ( raghiba). An example of which is qunut. According to Malik the person is not to make prostrations for relinquishing qunut for it is merely desirable (miwtaW) (lesser than a sunna) in his view, but he is to make prostrations according to al- Shafi T as it is a sunna in his view.

Walitofautiana (wanazuoni wa fiqhi) kuhusu maelezo ya sujudu za kusahau. Malik alikuwa na maoni kwamba hukmu ya sujudu mbili za kusahau zinapokuwa baada ya salamu ni kwamba mtu asome tashahhud na kutoa salamu. Hii ndiyo pia ilikuwa rai ya Abu Hanifa, kwa kuwa sujudu hizo katika mtazamo wake ni baada ya salamu katika kila hali. Ikiwa sujudu ziko kabla ya salamu, basi mtu asome tashahhud peke yake, na salamu ya sala ndiyo salamu ya sujudu hizo. Hii ilikuwa rai ya al-Shafi'i, kwa kuwa sujudu kama hizo daima ziko kabla ya salamu katika mtazamo wake. Pia imepokewa kutoka kwa Malik kwamba mtu asisome tashahhud katika kesi za sujudu zilizo kabla ya salamu. Hii pia ilikuwa rai ya kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi. Abu 'Umar amesema kuwa salamu baada ya zile zinazofuata (zinazokuja baada ya) salamu ya sala imethibitishwa kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ, lakini kuhusu tashahhud, mimi siwezi kuifuatilia katika riwaya yoyote sahihi.

They (the jurists) disagreed about the description of the prostrations of forgetfulness. Malik was of the view that the hukm of the two prostrations of forgetfulness when they are after the salutation is that the person should recite the tashahhud and offer the salutation. This was Abu HanTfa’s opinion also as the prostrations in his view are after the salutation in each case. If the prostrations are before the salutation then he should recite the tashahhud alone, and the salutation of the prayer is the salutation for the prostrations. This was al-ShafiTs opinion as such prostrations are always before the salutation in his view. It is also related from Malik that he is not to recite tashahhud in the. case of those that are before the salutation. This was also the opinion of a group of jurists. Abu TJmar has said that the salutation after those that follow (come after) the salutation (of the prayer) is established from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), as for the tashahhud, 1 cannot trace it in an authentic narration.

Sababu ya kutofautiana huku kunatokana na mzozo wao kuhusu uhalali wa kile kilichopokewa kuhusu hilo katika hadithi ya Ibn Mas'ud, kwamba Mtume ﷺ alisema: "Someni tashahhud kisha toeni salamu", na pia kufanana kati ya sijda za kusahau na sijda mbili za mwisho za sala. Wale waliolinganisha hizo mbili hawakufanya tashahhud kuwa wajibu, hasa pale zote mbili zilipokuwa ndani ya sala moja. Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir amesema kwamba wanazuoni walitofautiana katika suala hili na walikuwa na maoni sita. Kundi moja lilisema kwamba hakuna tashahhud ndani yake wala salamu. Huu ulikuwa msimamo wa Anas ibn Malik, al-Hasan, na 'Atwa'. Kundi la pili lilisema kinyume cha hilo, kwamba kuna tashahhud pamoja na salamu. Kundi la tatu lilisema kwamba kuna tashahhud, lakini hakuna salamu. Huu ulikuwa msimamo wa al-Hakam, Hammad, na al-Nakha'i. Kundi la nne lilisema kinyume cha hilo, kwamba kuna salamu ndani yake, lakini hakuna tashahhud. Huu ni msimamo wa Ibn Sirin. Maoni ya tano ni kwamba jambo hilo ni la hiari ya mwabudu; akipenda anaweza kusoma tashahhud na kutoa salamu, lakini hana wajibu wa kufanya hivyo. Hili limepokewa kutoka kwa Abu Hanifa. Maoni ya sita ni ya Ahmad ibn Hanbal kwamba mtu akisujudu baada ya salamu anapaswa kusoma tashahhud, lakini akisujudu kabla ya salamu hasomi tashahhud. Hii ndiyo tuliyopokea kutoka kwa Malik. Abu Bakr amesema kwamba imethibitika kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ kwamba alisema takbira mara nne kisha akatoa salamu, lakini uthibitisho wa kusoma kwake tashahhud unahitaji uchunguzi.

Walikubaliana kwamba kufanya sujud za sahau ni sunna kwa mwabudu peke yake pamoja na imamu. Walitofautiana kuhusu mfuasi anayesahau anaposwali nyuma ya imamu, je, ana wajibu wa kufanya sujud hizo. Wengi wa wanazuoni walishikilia kuwa imamu ndiye anayebeba jukumu la usahaulifu kwa niaba ya mfuasi, lakini Makhul alitoa kauli potofu kwa kufanya sujud hizo kuwa za lazima kwa usahaulifu wake mwenyewe.

They agreed that performing the prostrations of forgetfulness is a sunna for the single worshipper as well as the imam. They disagreed about the follower who forgets while praying behind the imam whether he is he under an obligation to make the prostrations. The majority maintained that the imam bears the responsibility for forgetfulness on behalf of the follower, but Makhul made a deviant statement making the prostrations binding for his own forgetfulness.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na mzozo wao juu ya vipengele gani vya sala ambavyo imamu hubeba kwa niaba ya mfuasi. Wote walikubaliana kwamba ikiwa imamu atasahau jambo, mfuasi anamfuata katika sujud za kusahau, hata kama alijiunga naye baada ya kusahau kwake. Walitofautiana kuhusu wakati mfuasi anapaswa kusujudu ikiwa amekosa sehemu ya sala pamoja na imamu, na nani anapaswa kufanya sujud hizo. Kundi moja la wanazuoni lilisema kwamba yeye hufanya sujud pamoja na imamu kisha husimama kutekeleza sehemu aliyoikosa, iwe imamu alisujudu kabla au baada ya salamu. Msimamo huu uliungwa mkono na 'Atwaa, al-Hasan, al-Nakha'i, al-Sha'bi, Ahmad, Abu Thawr, na wafuasi wa ra'y (maoni ya kiakili). Kundi jingine la wanazuoni lilisema kwamba yeye anapaswa kukamilisha sala yake kisha asujudu. Msimamo huu ulishikiliwa na Ibn Sirin na Ishaq. Kundi la tatu la wanazuoni lilisema kwamba ikiwa imamu atasujudu kabla ya salamu, anapaswa kusujudu pamoja naye, lakini ikiwa imamu atasujudu baada ya salamu, yeye anapaswa kukamilisha sala yake mwenyewe kisha asujudu. Msimamo huu uliungwa mkono na Malik, al-Layth, na al-Shafi'i. Kundi la nne la wanazuoni lilisema kwamba kwanza yeye hufanya sujud pamoja na imamu kisha huzifanya tena mara ya pili baada ya kukamilisha sala yake. Msimamo huu ulishikiliwa na al-Shafi'i.

The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute over wha constituent elements of prayer the imam bears on behalf of the follower. The; agreed that if the imam forgets something the follower follows him in hi prostrations of forgetfulness, even if he joined him after his forgetfulnes’ They disagreed as to when the follower is to prostrate if he has missed part of the prayer with the imam, who has to make the prostrations. A group of jurists said that he makes the prostrations with the imam and then stands up to perform the part he had missed, whether the imam performed his prostrations before or after the salutation. This was upheld by cAt5\ al-Hasan, al-. Nakha T, c al-ShaHn, Ahmad, Abu Thawr, and the upholders of ra*y (opinion). Another group of jurists said that he is to complete his prayer and then prostrate. This was held by Ibn Sirin and Ishaq. A third group of jurists said that if the imam makes the prostrations before the salutation, he should prostrate with him, but if the imam makes the prostrations after salutation he is to complete his own prayer and then make the prostrations. This was upheld by Malik, al-Layth, and al-Shafi T. The c fourth group of jurists said that he is first to make the prostrations with the imam and then to make them a second time after completing his prayer. This was held by al-Shafi€i.

Walikubaliana kwamba njia ya kumtahadharisha mtu anayesahau katika swala yake ni kutamka tasbihi (kusema subhana Allah). Hata hivyo, hii ni kwa wanaume kutokana na yaliyothibitishwa kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ, aliposema: "Vipi nakuona mnapiga makofi (tasfiq) mara kwa mara? Yeyote anayepatwa na jambo katika swala yake na amtukuze Allah (tasbihi), kwani anapotamka tasbihi, atavuta umakini. Na kupiga makofi ni kwa wanawake."

They agreed that the way to alert a person who forgets in his prayer is to pronounce tasbih (saying subhdna Allah). This, however, is for men because of what is established from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “Why is it that I see you clapping hands (tasjiq) frequently. One , who is afflicted by something in his prayer should engage in the glorification of Allah (tasbih), for when he utters the tasbih, he will attract attention. And lapping hands is for women”.

! Walitofautiana kuhusu wanawake. Malik na kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi walisema kwamba tasbih ni kwa wanaume na wanawake pia. Al-Shafi'i na kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi walisema kwamba tasbih ni kwa wanaume, ilhali tasfiq (kupiga kwa kiganja cha mkono wa kulia sehemu ya nyuma ya kiganja cha mkono wa kushoto) ni kwa wanawake.

! They disagreed in the case of women. Malik and a group of jurists said that tasbih is both for meh and women. Al-Shafi T and a group of jurists c said that tasbih is for men, while tasfiq (striking the back of the left hand with the palm of the right) is for women.

Sababu ya kutofautiana kwao inatokana na mzozo wao kuhusu maana ya maneno ya Mtume ﷺ, "tasfiq ni kwa wanawake". Wale waliodhani kwamba maana ya maneno haya ni kwamba tasfiq ndiyo hukmu kwa wanawake pale wanaposahau, ambayo ndiyo maana ya wazi, walisema kwamba wanawake wanapaswa kufanya tasfiq wala si tasbih. Wale waliofahamu kutoka hapo kwamba tasfiq imepunguzwa thamani walisema kwamba wanaume na wanawake ni sawa katika tasbih, lakini kuna udhaifu fulani katika maoni haya kwa sababu yanamaanisha kuacha maana ya wazi bila ushahidi, isipokuwa mtu afananishe hali ya wanawake na ya wanaume. Hukmu kwa wanawake mara nyingi hutofautiana na ile ya wanaume katika swala, jambo ambalo linadhoofisha kufananisha huko.

The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute over the implication of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “tasfiq is for women”. Those who held that the meaning of these words is that tasfiq is the hukm for women in case of forgetfulness, which is the apparent meaning, said that the women are to engage in tasfiq and not in tasbih. Those who comprehended a derogation of tasfiq from this said that men and women are equal in terms of tasbih, but there is some weakness in this view because it amounts to a departure from the apparent meaning without an evidence, unless an analogy with the case of men is drawn for women. The hukm for women is often different from that of men in the case of prayer, a fact which weakens the analogy.