本部分讲述那些不被视为按时完成的拜功行为，即重复（i‘āda）、延后完成（qaḍā'）以及通过（因忘记而行的）叩拜来弥补拜功中的增加或减少（jabr）。因此，本部分共有三章。第一章讲述“fidda”（重复或再次履行）。第二章讲述“qaḍā'”（延后履行）。第三章讲述通过叩拜完成的弥补。

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.

本章讨论的内容涉及需要重复礼拜的原因，即使礼拜无效的因素。学者们一致认为，无论是故意还是因遗忘而未经净化就礼拜的人，都有义务重新礼拜（在净化之后）。同样，无论是故意还是出于错误而面向非克俄白方向礼拜的人，也是如此。总的来说，违反礼拜条件之一的人，有义务以正确的方式重新礼拜。（以上均为法学家的一致意见。）法学家们之间的分歧，源于他们对礼拜有效条件的不同见解。

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.

还有一些有争议的问题，超出了礼拜的基本要素范围。其中之一是：他们一致认为，失去洁净状态（hadath）的情况发生会使礼拜中断（失效）。但在此问题上，他们存在分歧：是否需要从头重新礼拜，包括在hadath发生之前已完成的一两拜（rakʿah），还是可以在已完成的部分基础上继续礼拜。多数学者认为，无论是hadath还是其他使礼拜失效的情况（例如做出不必要的动作），都不应以继续为基础，唯独鼻出血的情况例外。另有一些学者认为，无论是hadath还是鼻出血，都不应以继续为基础，这是al-Shafiʿī的观点。库法学派则认为，各种hadath的情况都应以继续为基础来完成礼拜。

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.

他们产生分歧的原因在于：对于这种情况（即继续完成拜功），并没有见于记载的先知（愿主的赞颂与平安降临于他）允许的传述；但有明确记载说，伊本·欧麦尔（Ibn Umar）流过鼻血，于是在洗去血迹之后，未重新做小净便继续拜功，并据此认定（重复拜功）的做法。主张这一行为属于圣门弟子的先例、因为他不可能凭类比来做这种事的人，便允许这种做法。认为鼻血不构成小污的人，只在鼻血的情况下允许继续拜功，这是马立克的观点。认为鼻血构成小污的人，则依据类比，允许在一切小污的情况下继续拜功。而那些认为圣门弟子的行为不可依据、除非是来自先知的先例的人，则既不允许在小污的情况下继续，也不允许在鼻血的情况下继续，因为学者们一致认为，礼拜者若面向克尔白以外的方向，其拜功即已失效；礼拜者若有过多的动作，同样如此。

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.

学者们对于在礼拜者前面经过的东西是否会使其礼拜中断存在分歧：一种情况是他在没有遮拦（sutra）的情况下礼拜，另一种情况是经过的东西位于他与遮拦之间。多数学者认为，这些情况都不会使礼拜中断，礼拜者也无需重新礼拜。另有一部分学者主张，礼拜会被女人、驴或黑狗的经过所打断。

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.

这一分歧的原因在于一条训令与一项行为之间的冲突。穆斯林从艾卜·祖尔那里记载，先知（愿真主的慈悯与祝福降临于他）说："女人、驴和黑狗[从礼拜者面前经过]会使礼拜中断。"穆斯林和布哈里从阿伊莎那里记载，她说："我躺在真主的使者（愿真主的慈悯与祝福降临于他）礼拜的地方前面，就像停放在葬礼上的遗体一样。"阿里和乌班耶也有与多数学者的观点相近的传述。学者们对于有东西从独自礼拜者或在没有遮拦物时领拜的伊玛目面前经过，或从其与遮拦物之间经过，是可憎的，并无异议。但他们认为从帷幕后面经过并无妨碍。同样，他们也认为从随礼者的行列前面经过并无妨碍，依据的是伊本·阿拔斯等人的可靠传述。伊本·阿拔斯说："我骑着一头驴来，当时我已接近成年，真主的使者（愿真主的慈悯与祝福降临于他）正带领众人礼拜。我从几排行列前面经过，下驴让驴去吃草，然后加入了一排行列。没有人因此而反对我。"在他们看来，这类似于一则归于先知的圣训（musnad），但这一说法仍需审查。

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.

大多数学者一致认为，从礼拜者面前穿过是可憎的，这是因为对此已有的警告，也因为先知（愿主的安拉的祝福与平安降临于他）所说的话："推开他，因为他就是恶魔。"147

The majority agreed about the abomination of something passing before the praying worshipper because of the warning issued in this regard, and also because of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) “Push him away, for he is the devil”.147

他们在祷告中打嗝一事上存在分歧,有三种观点。一派法学家认为打嗝是可憎的,但不要求打嗝者重新礼拜。另一派则规定打嗝者必须重新礼拜。第三派则区分打嗝是否发出了声音:能听到声音的与听不到的有所不同。他们产生分歧的原因在于,打嗝的性质介于"说话"与"非说话"之间,摇摆不定。

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.

他们一致认为大笑会使礼拜无效。他们对微笑存在分歧。这一分歧的根源在于：微笑是否可以适用大笑的裁决。

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.

他们对忍住大小便（hdqin）之人的礼拜存在分歧。多数法学家认为，人在忍住大小便时礼拜是可憎的（makruh），其依据是宰德·本·艾尔格姆的圣训，他说：“我听见安拉的使者ﷺ说：‘你们中若有人想去厕所，就应在开始礼拜之前去。’”同时也依据从阿伊莎传述的先知ﷺ的话：“在有食物在场时，或在忍住两种污秽（即小便和大便）时，任何人都不应礼拜。”另外，还依据欧麦尔禁止此事的传述。

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.

一些法学家认为,这类人的礼拜是无效的,他必须重新礼拜。伊本·嘉西姆转述马立克的说法表明,忍住大小便之人的礼拜是无效的。其理由在于,他转述马立克说,这类人须在时间结束之前重新礼拜,否则就须以补拜(qadā')的方式进行礼拜。

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>.

分歧的原因在于他们对禁止性规定的理解之争：该禁令是表明被禁之事本身无效，还是仅表明在该情形下此行为有罪，而被禁之事原本是应为或许可的。主张此类拜功无效的人，依据了叙利亚人所传的一段圣训，其中有人是从塞wbān处传述，也有人是从艾布·胡莱赖（Abu Hurayra）处传自先知ﷺ，他说："信士在强忍大小便的时候礼拜是不被允许的。"艾布·欧玛尔（Abu 'Umar）说，这段圣训的传述链薄弱，因此不具有法律效力。

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.

他们对礼拜者回应他人问候一事存在分歧。一派学者，包括赛义德·本·穆subayyab、哈桑·本·哈桑·巴士里和население Qatada（卡塔德），允许这样做。另一派不允许以言语回应，但允许以手势回应，这是马立克和沙斐仪的观点。还有一些人禁止以言语或手势回应，这是艾卜·哈尼法的观点。一派允许以默念方式回应，而另一些人则认为应当在礼拜结束后再回应。

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.

他们之间产生分歧的原因在于：回应问候是否属于礼拜中被禁止的言语。那些认为回应问候属于礼拜中被禁止的言语的人，以经文"当有人以问候向你们致意时，你们当以更优美的问候回敬，或者以同样的问候回答"^148 的经文限定了禁止礼拜中言语的圣训，因此主张礼拜中不允许回应问候。那些认为回应问候不属于被禁止的言语的人，以及以回应问候的命令限定禁止言语的圣训的人，则允许在礼拜中回应。

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

他们对礼拜者回应他人问候一事存在分歧。一派学者，包括赛义德·本·穆subayyab、哈桑·本·哈桑·巴士里和население Qatada（卡塔德），允许这样做。另一派不允许以言语回应，但允许以手势回应，这是马立克和沙斐仪的观点。还有一些人禁止以言语或手势回应，这是艾卜·哈尼法的观点。一派允许以默念方式回应，而另一些人则认为应当在礼拜结束后再回应。

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.

他们之间分歧的原因在于：回应问候是否属于礼拜中被禁止的言语。那些认为回应问候属于礼拜中被禁止的言语的人，以及用禁止礼拜中说话的圣训来限定“当有人以问候向你们致意时，你们应以更优的问候还礼，或者予以回复”这节经文的人，认为礼拜中不允许回应。那些认为回应问候不在被禁止的言语之列的人，以及用回应问候的命令来限定禁止礼拜中说话之圣训的人，则允许在礼拜中回应。艾布·伯克尔·伊本·蒙迪尔曾说：主张对问候完全不予回应的人，是违背了圣行（逊奈）的，因为哈比卜曾传述，先知ﷺ在礼拜时，曾以手势回应向他致意的人。

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.

本章讨论的内容包括：确定哪些人必须履行qaddā'（补偿/补还）的义务，阐述qaddā'的各种类型，以及其条件。

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.

穆斯林法学家一致认为，需要补做（qadd）的人，是因忘记或睡着而错过礼拜时间的人。至于故意拖延礼拜直至时间过去的人，以及昏厥的人，他们则存在分歧。 穆斯林法学家对因忘记或睡眠而错过礼拜的人须补做，意见一致，其依据是关于先知（愿主的赐福和平安降临于他）言行的可靠记载。我所说的言论，是指他的话：“笔已被提起于三类人之上”，其中他提到了睡着的人；还有他的话：“若你们中有人睡过了［礼拜的］时间，或忘记了礼拜，那么当他想起来时就应当补做。”此外还有记载说，先知本人有一次睡过了头，直到日出才醒来，随后便补做了礼拜。 至于故意忽视礼拜、直到时间过去的人，多数学者认为，他是有罪的，并且他必须补做。也有部分祖含里派学者认为，他是有罪的，但他不需要补做。持此观点的祖含里派学者之一是艾布·穆罕默德·伊本·哈兹姆。

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.

由于两人的分歧，原因在于他们在两件事上的争论。第一件是在教法中运用类比（qiyās）是否允许。第二件是在承认类比有效之后，对于故意疏忽而不礼拜者，能否以遗忘者为类比对象。那些主张对他强制补做（qadā'）的人认为：既然对遗忘者都强制补做了，而教法在许多情况下已经免除了他的责任，那么对于无故意疏忽、毫无借口的故意放弃者，理应同样强制补做。那些不允许将遗忘者作为故意放弃者的类比对象的人则认为：遗忘者与故意放弃者是相对立的两类，相对立的事物不能进行类比，因为它们的规定各不相同；而类比只能用于相似的情况。 这里的真理是：如果把补做的义务看作对过失者的加重惩罚，那么类比就是恰当的；但如果把它看作对遗忘者的体恤，因为他有借口，而这一利益不应被剥夺，那么故意放弃者便与遗忘者相对立，类比不能成立，因为遗忘者有借口，而故意放弃者没有。原则是：补做（qadā'）之所以成为义务，不是因为规定时间内履行（adā'）的命令，而是因为一条新的命令，正如神学家（Mutakallimūn）所主张的那样。因为遗忘者缺少使行为得以有效履行的条件之一，即时间，而时间正是有效性的条件之一；时间的推迟，在类比上就等同于对他的一种让步。然而，有一段圣训已经裁定了遗忘者与睡眠者的情况；至于故意放弃者的情况，则在与他们相似与不相似之间摇摆。唯有真主引导人走向真理。

The reason for their disagreement is due to their dispute over two things. The first is the permissibility of employing qiyds (analogy) in the law. The second is the construction of analogy for the person who intentionally neglects to pray over one who forgets, once the validity of qiyds has been conceded. Those who made qadd obligatory on him maintained that if qadd has been imposed upon the person forgetting, whom the law has exempted in so many cases, it is appropriate that it be obligatory for the intentional forsaker who has no excuse. Those who did not permit the analogy of the person forgetting for the intentional relinquisher maintained that the person forgetting and the intentional relinquisher are opposites, and analogy cannot be undertaken for opposites, as the ahdm of the opposites are different, and that analogy is to be constructed for similar cases. The truth here is that if obligation (for qadffi) is considered as an enhanced liability (penalty) analogy would be true to form but if it is considered as compassion for the person forgetting, for he has an excuse—and this benefit should not be denied to him—then the intentional relinquisher is the opposite of the person forgetting and the analogy is not formed since the person forgetting has an excuse while the intentional relinquisher does not. The principle is that qada? is not obligatory because of the command of add? (timely performance), but through a renewed command, as maintained by the Mutakallimun, for the person forgetting lacks one of the conditions enabling him to perform the act in a valid manner, and this (condition) is time, which is one of the conditions of validity, and a delay in time amounts, in analogy, to a concession for him. There is a tradition, however, that settles the case of the persons forgetting and the persons sleeping; the case of the intentional relinquisher vacillates between being similar to their case and not being so. It is Allah who guides to the truth.

他们在礼拜的顺序问题上存在分歧,即是否有义务遵守已错过礼拜之间的顺序,以及错过的礼拜与当前礼拜之间的顺序。马立克认为,对于五次礼拜或更少数量的礼拜,遵守先后顺序是义务,即使当前礼拜的时间因此将要错过,人也应当先补记被遗忘的礼拜。他甚至认为,如果人正在做当前的礼拜时想起了某个被遗忘的礼拜,那么他的当前礼拜就因此无效。艾卜·哈尼法和萨乌里也持类似的观点,只是他们认为只有在当前礼拜的时间足够长时(对于补礼拜和当时的礼拜而言),才有遵守顺序的义务。这些法学家一致认为,在遗忘的情况下,遵守顺序的义务是可以免除的。沙斐仪则说,遵守顺序并非义务,但如果他这样做,并且时间足够容纳当前的礼拜,那么这是值得称赞的。

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.

他们之间产生分歧的原因，一方面在于关于此问题的圣训存在冲突，另一方面在于他们对"qadd"与"add"之间是否存在相似之处存在不同看法。关于此问题有两段相互冲突的圣训。第一段是传述自先知ﷺ的话："若有人忘记了一场拜功，而在与伊玛目一同礼另一场拜时想起，他应当跟随伊玛目完成拜功。待他礼完这场拜后，应当补礼他所忘记的那场拜，然后再补礼他与伊玛目一同所礼的那场拜。"沙斐仪学派的学者认为这段圣训较为薄弱，而他们则认可伊本·阿拔斯的圣训，即先知ﷺ说："若你们中有人忘记了一场拜功，并在礼另一场规定的拜时想起，那么他应当完成正在礼的拜，礼毕后再以补拜（qadd）的方式礼他所忘记的那场拜。"然而，关于此议题的可靠圣训是更早出现的那一段，其中先知ﷺ的话是："若你们中有人睡过了拜时，或忘记了拜，那么他应当在想起时礼拜。"

The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of the traditions on the issue, and also from their difference over the existence of a resemblance between qadd and add. There are two conflicting traditions on the issue. The first is what is related from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “A person who has forgotten a prayer [and remembers it] while he is offering another with an imam should continue with the imam. After he has offered this prayer, he should repeat [offer] the prayer he has forgotten and then repeat the prayer he offered with the imam”. The disciples of al-ShaficT consider this to be a weak tradition, while they authenticate the tradition of Ibn cAbbas that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “If one of you forgets a prayer and remembers it while he is offering another prescribed prayer, then, he should complete that which he is offering and once he has finished it he should offer as qadd the forgotten prayer”. Yet the authentic tradition on this topic is one that has preceded, where the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) are: “If one of you slept through [the time of] prayer or forgot it, then let him observe the prayer when he remembers”.

关于何时算失去一个rak'a（拜的一个段落）的问题，涉及两种情况。第一，信徒在伊玛目已经弯腰行鞠躬（ruku'）时才加入礼拜；第二，他与伊玛目一同礼拜时忘记跟随伊玛目行鞠躬，或者发生了某种拥挤推搡，使他无法这样做。

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.

有三种观点。第一种为大多数学者所持，即如果他能在伊玛目抬起头从鞠躬（ruk#）中起身之前赶上，并能与他一同鞠躬，那么他就已赶上这一拉克阿（rakfa），便无需补做（qadd*）。这些法学家在以下问题上存在分歧：参与者是否必须念两次泰克比尔（takbir），即开始的泰克比尔和鞠躬的泰克比尔；或者鞠躬的泰克比尔是否足以替代；如果认为可以替代，那么是否还须以此同时表达开始泰克比尔的意图。其中一些人说，如果在其中包含开始泰克比尔的意图，一次泰克比尔就足够了。这是马利克和沙斐仪的观点，但在他们看来，更可取的是念两次泰克比尔。一些法学家认为必须念两次泰克比尔。另一些人则认为，即使没有以此表达开始泰克比尔的意图，念一次也足够了。

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.

第二种观点认为,如果伊玛目已经进入鞠躬(ruku')的姿势,那么此人便失去了这一拜的一个副拜(rak'a)。他不能获得它,除非他是在与伊玛目一同站立之后才进入鞠躬。这一观点被归于艾卜·胡莱赖(Abu Hurayra)。 第三种观点认为,如果他走近最后一排时,伊玛目已经从鞠躬中抬起头来,但排中有些人尚未抬头,他加入他们并进入鞠躬,那么他已获得了这一副拜,因为有些人在带领其他人。这一观点为沙斐仪(al-Sha'i)所支持。 这一分歧的原因在于“副拜”(rak'a)一词的含义在两种意义之间摇摆:一是单指鞠躬的行为,二是将鞠躬与站立合起来的整体含义。先知(愿安拉赐福于他并使他平安)曾说:“谁赶上了拜的一个副拜,谁就赶上了这拜。”伊本·孟齐尔(Ibn al-Mundhir)称,这段圣训被确认为出自安拉的使者(愿安拉赐福于他并使他平安)的可靠传述。 那些认为“副拜”一词同时指鞠躬与站立的人说,如果此人没有与伊玛目一同站立,他就失去了这一副拜。那些认为“副拜”一词仅指鞠躬本身的人,则视赶上鞠躬为获得了这一副拜。 这一术语中存在的歧义(ishtirak),在于它在字面义与术语义之间的摇摆:按字面义,该词只指鞠躬;而按术语义,它包括站立、鞠躬和叩头。那些主张先知所说“谁赶上了一个副拜”中的“副拜”取术语义的人,也不采纳那种接受“名称所指示之部分”的观点,他们认为此人必须与伊玛目一同完成三个动作,即站立、鞠躬和叩头。 有可能，那些倾向于认为“拥有”（即赶上一个拜）的人，只考虑了该术语所指的主要部分，因为赶上鞠躬的人获得了两个部分，而错过鞠躬的人只能获得一个部分。基于此，他们的分歧所涉及的是：接受某一术语所指的一部分，还是接受其全部所指，这一争议。对于这两种观点，都可以找到相应的分歧。

The. second opinion is that if the imam has gone into ruku\ the person has lost the rak'a, and that he cannot attain it unless he had done so after standing with the imam. This is attributed to Abu Hurayra. The third opinion is that if he approaches the last row when the imam has raised his head from the ruku\ but some of those in the row have not and he joins them in ruku\ he has gained the rak^ay for some are leading the others. This was upheld by al- Sha^T. The reason for this disagreement derives from, the vacillation of the meaning of the term rak a between the act c of bowing alone, and the combined meaning of bowing and standing taken together. The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) has said, “One who has caught a rak'a of the prayer has caught the prayer”. Ibn al-Mundhir states that this tradition was established as authentic from the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). Those for whom the term rak^a is applied to mean both bowing and standing said that if the person has missed the standing posture with the imam, he has lost the rak^a. Those for whom the term rakfa is applied to bowing itself deemed .the catching of bowing as the attainment of the rakfa. The equivocality (ishtardk) that is found in this term is its vacillation between the literal and the technical meanings, as the term in its literal sense applies to bowing only, but in its technical meaning it applies to standing, bowing, and ,prostrating. Those who maintained that the term rakza in the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “One who has caught a rakW, applies to the technical meaning, and also did not adopt the opinion of those who accept part of what is indicated by names, said that it is necessary for the person to observe all three acts with the imam, that is, standing bowing and prostrating. It is possible that those who were inclined to consider bowing only took into account the major part indicated by the term, as the person who has been able to participate in bowing has caught two parts, while the person who has missed bowing has been able to secure one part alone. On the basis of this, their disagreement refers to the dispute about accepting part of what is denoted by a term or by the entire denotation. It is possible to find disagreement with both views.

关于跟随者在鞠躬时忘记跟随伊玛目、直到伊玛目叩头的情况，一些法学家认为：如果他没有与伊玛目一同完成鞠躬，那么他已失去该拜中的这一拱（rak'a），并且有义务在自己的拜（在其祝词之前）补行这一拱作为还拜（qada）。另一些法学家认为：如果他能够在伊玛目开始下一拱之前完成叩头，那么他可以将这一拱计为已完成。第三组法学家认为：只要伊玛目在第二拱鞠躬后尚未抬头，他就应当跟随伊玛目，并将这一拱计为已完成。马立克学派内部存在这一分歧，并且在细节上也有相当大的争议，此外他们还在以下问题上存在分歧：所遗漏之事是由于健忘所致还是由于推挤所致，发生在主麻拜中还是其他拜中，以及这种情况是跟随者在第一拱中遇到的还是在其他拱中遇到的。

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.

由于我们的目的不在于记录各种观点的细节，也不在于从中推导结论，而只在于指出其中的根本问题及其基本原则，因此我们说如下内容。

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:

关于这一问题的分歧，其起因在于：跟随者的动作是否必须与伊玛目的动作同时进行（或紧接其后），此条件是否适用于拜功一拉克尔中的三个组成动作，即站立、鞠躬和叩头，还是只适用于其中某些动作。此外，如果跟随者的动作不是紧接伊玛目的动作，即他正在做一个动作而伊玛目已进入下一个动作，那么在什么情况下他的行为会违背伊玛目？ 主张一拉克尔中的每个组成动作都有此条件的人认为：跟随者的动作应与伊玛目的同一动作同时进行，否则便是脱离了伊玛目。先知穆罕默德ﷺ曾说：“设立伊玛目是为了让人跟随他，所以不要违背他。”他们认为，如果跟随者未能与伊玛目同时鞠躬，即便只是很小的一部分，也就错过了这一拉克尔。 只考虑其中一部分动作的人则认为：如果跟随者在伊玛目起身进入下一拉克尔之前，已完成了该拉克尔的一部分，他便算获得了该拉克尔，这并不构成违背伊玛目。如果伊玛目已经起身进入第二拉克尔，而跟随者仍在追赶他完成第一拉克尔的动作，那么这就构成了对第一拉克尔的违背。 还有人主张：只要伊玛目还未在下一拉克尔中鞠躬，跟随者就可以继续完成自己的动作。他们认为，跟随者动作的每一部分或整体都不必与伊玛目动作的每一部分或整体相吻合，唯一的条件是跟随者的动作发生在伊玛目动作之后。 他们一致认为：如果伊玛目在第二拜中鞠躬之后已经起身，那么跟随者不应将该拜计为已完成，前提是他在其中一直在进行其动作。因为这些动作会被赋予第一拜的裁决，而伊玛目则适用第二拜的裁决，这显然等同于违背了伊玛目。

The reason for the the disagreement in this issue arises from the dispute about whether it is a condition for the movements of the follower that they should accompany (or immediately follow) those of the imam, and whether this condition applies to all the three constituent acts of the rak^a, that is, standing, bowing and prostrating, or is it a condition only for some of them? Further, when does his act go against him if this act does not (immediately) follow the act of the imam, that is, when he is performing one act and the imam is performing the next? Those who held that it is a condition for each constituent act of a single rak'a—that is, the act of the follower should be concurrent with the same act of the imam, for otherwise this would amount to dissociating himself from the imam, and the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) has said, “The imam has been appointed so that he be followed, so do not go against him”—said that if he fails to accompany the imam in the ruku\ even though a small part of it, he would miss the rak^a. Those who took into account only a part of it said that he collects the rak'a if he collects a part of the rak'a before the imam rises for the next rakfa, and this does not amount to going against him. If the imam has risen into the second rak'a and the follower is pursuing him (in the acts of the first), then, this amounts to going against him for the first rakfa. Those who said that he may pursue his acts as long the imam has not bowed in the next rak'a, held the opinion that it is not a condition/or each segment of the act of the/follower that it coincide with each segment of the act of the imam nor as a whole, but the condition is only that it take place after it. They agreed that if the imam has risen after bowing in the second rak'a, then, the follower is not to count that rakfa as performed, if he has been pursuing his acts in it, for these would be assigned the hukm of the first while the imam is subject to the hukm of the second, and this evidently amounts to going against him.

这一主题的三个基本原则问题中，第二个问题是：跟随者在补做他错过的、属于伊玛目拜功的那部分时，这一行为算作“添加”（ada）还是“补足”（qadaa）。对此问题有三种观点。

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.

一些法学家认为,跟随者在伊玛目讲完问候语之后所补完的部分称为"qadd"(补做,即"qadd"部分),而他随伊玛目所做的部分并不是他拜功的第一部分。另一些人则认为,他在伊玛目讲完问候语之后所补做的部分称为"add"(接续),而他随伊玛目所做的部分才是他拜功的第一部分。第三类人区分言语与行为,认为他对言语部分按"qadd"来做,即诵读;而对行为部分则继续按"add"来做,即接续其后。 因此,依照第一种观点,即把跟随者所补做的部分视为"qadd"的观点,能够赶上马格里卜拜中一拉卡的人,将在伊玛目以问候语结束拜功时起身,做两拉卡,每一拉卡都诵读《古兰经》首章和另一章,两拉卡之间不坐。依照第二种以接续为基础的观点,他将起身做一拉卡,在其中诵读《古兰经》首章和另一章,然后坐下;之后再起身做另一拉卡,在其中只诵读《古兰经》首章。依照第三种观点,他将起身做一拉卡,在其中诵读《古兰经》首章和另一章,然后坐下;之后再起身做第二拉卡,同样在其中诵读《古兰经》首章和另一章。

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.

所有三种观点都被归于马立克学派，而马立克本人的可靠观点是：他按字面以"qadd"（补做/代偿）来理解，但在行为上则是继续完成。因为在日落礼拜中，关于马立克的观点没有分歧：如果人跟随伊玛目只赶上了一拉克尔（rakʿa），那么他应当站起来做第二拉克尔，然后采取坐姿；关于马立克的观点，也没有争议：此人应当诵读《古兰经》开端章和另一章，作为"qadāʾ"（补做）。 分歧的原因在于：在该著名圣训的某些版本中写道："你们能赶上的就拜，你们错过的就补全。"其中"补全"（itmām）意味着他所赶上观察到的，是其礼拜的前半部分。而在另一些版本中，原文是："你们能赶上的就拜，你们错过的就以补做（qadāʾ）的方式拜。"其中"补做"（qadāʾ）意味着他所赶上观察到的，是其礼拜的后半部分。 因此，主张"补全"说的人认为，他所观察到的是礼拜的前半部分；主张"补做"说的人认为，他所观察到的是礼拜的后半部分。采用调和之法的人则认为，这些措辞应视为"补做"，而行为应视为"完成"。然而，这一说法是薄弱的，即礼拜的一部分应当是"完成"（adāʾ），一部分应当是"补做"（qadāʾ）。

All three opinions have been attributed to the School (Malik’s) and the authentic opinion from Malik is that he performs the words as qadd> and continues in the acts, because there is no discrepancy in his opinion about the sunset prayer that if the person catches one rakfa (with the imam) then he is to stand for the second rakfa and then adopt the sitting posture; and there is no dispute about his opinion that the person is to recite the umm al-Qur*dn and another sura as qada?. The reason for disagreement was that in some versions of the well-known tradition it is laid down: “Pray what you are able to catch and complete what you have lost”, and completion implies that what he has been able to observe is the first part of his prayer. In other versions the words are, “Pray what you are able to catch and offer as qadd? what you have lost”, where qada> implies that what he has been able to observe (with the imam) is the last part of his prayer. Thus, those who adopted the opinion of completion said that what he has observed is the first part of his prayer. Those who adopted the opinion of qadd> said that what he observed was the last part of his prayer. Those who adopted the method of reconciliation deemed the words to be qadd? and the acts as add*. This, however, is weak, that is, part of the prayer should be add? and part qad&.

一群法学家认为,如果他能赶上一个拜克尔·主麻拜的拉克尔,那么他就已经完成了主麻拜,他应在伊玛目的致礼之后补做第二拉克尔;但如果他赶上的不足一拉克尔,则应当作宰赫尔拜来拜四拉克尔。这是马立克和沙斐仪的观点。另一群法学家则认为,无论他跟随伊玛目赶上了多少拜功,都应补足两拉克尔。这是艾布·哈尼法的观点。这一问题上分歧的原因,在于先知(愿真主赐予他慈恩与平安)的两段圣训之间似乎存在冲突:一是“你们能赶上的就拜,你们落下的就补完”,二是“谁赶上了一拉克尔的拜功,谁就赶上了这拜”。依据“你们落下的就补完”这一表述的人,主张跟随者即使赶上的不足两拉克尔,也必须拜两拉克尔。而依据“他就赶上了这拜”这句话的人,认为其中隐含了一个词,即“他赶上了拜的裁定(hukm)”,并且从文本的隐含意义(dalil al-khitab)推出:赶上不足一拉克尔的人,并未赶上拜的裁定。然而,这段文本中所隐含的词有多种可能:它可能指拜的功德,可能指拜的时间,也可能指拜的裁定。若其中某一种含义并不比其他含义更明显,那么该文本便属于“mujmal”(含混、未明确的表述)的范畴,而这类表述不能据以推出裁定,此时就应优先采用另一段具有一般含义的文本。 然而，如果我们承认其中一种隐含意义是明显的，例如依照持此观点者的意见，礼拜的裁决即是如此，那么，这一明显的意义并不与（另一段文本中的）一般性含义相冲突，除非将其视为文本指示（rfa/f/ al-khitab）的一类；但一般性含义，经一致公认，强于文本的指示，尤其是基于若干或然性或明显意义的指示。另一方面，那些主张先知ﷺ所说的“他赶上了礼拜”这句话包含所有隐含意义的人，其观点是薄弱的，在阿拉伯语的用法中也不为人所知，除非主张存在这样一种约定俗成或专门术语的含义。

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.

关于跟随者在遗忘性叩拜（即遗忘拜）中跟随伊玛目的问题，一些法学家以至少赶上与伊玛目共同完成一拜（一个拉克尔）为依据，另一些法学家则没有考虑这一条件。没有考虑这一条件的人，依据先知ﷺ的话语所蕴含的一般含义作出裁定："设立伊玛目是为了让人跟随他"。考虑了一拜这一条件的人，则依据先知ﷺ的话语的含义作出裁定："他已赶上了拜功"。正因如此，他们在第三个分支问题上也出现了分歧。

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.

一群法学家说，如果旅行者在定居地跟随处于定居状态的伊玛目礼拜，只赶上了少于一个拉克尔（礼拜单元），那么他不应当像定居者一样完成其余的礼拜；但如果他赶上了一个拉克尔，则必须完成全部礼拜。

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.

这就是关于当跟随者（ma'mum）之前伊玛目已经开始拜功时，拜功中部分被“qadd”（抵扣/补做）的裁决。

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

关于因为伊玛目或独自礼拜者的遗忘而发生的礼拜部分的补救（卡迪aa），学者们一致认为：凡属礼拜的必要组成部分（鲁克numberland，即义务），必须以补救的方式完成，否则礼拜不成立。然而其中也有他们存在分歧的问题：有人认为在这些问题上必须进行补做（qada'），有人则要求重新礼拜。例如，一个人在四个拜中忘记了四次叩头，每拜各漏一次叩头。一组学者认为，他应当补做第四次叩头，并视之前的拜为无效，然后重新礼拜，这是马立克的观点。另一组学者认为，整个礼拜无效，必须重新礼拜，这是艾哈迈德的一则传述。第三组学者认为，他应连续补做四次叩头，礼拜即告完成，这是艾布·哈尼法、赛吾里和奥扎仪的观点。第四组学者认为，第四拜应以两次叩头进行补救，这是沙斐仪的观点。

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.

对于此事的分歧，其根源在于是否考虑顺序的问题。那些在拜的各个拉克尔和叩头中都考虑顺序的人，认为拜就因此无效。那些只在叩头中考虑顺序的人，认为除最后一次叩头外的其余叩头无效，类比于跟随者错过伊玛目拜的部分。那些不考虑顺序的人，则允许在一个拉克尔中一次性完成整个拜的叩头，尤其是当他们认为顺序在每个拉克尔中重复的行为中并非必需时，即在叩头中，因为每个拉克尔都包含站立、鞠躬和叩头，而叩头是重复的。因此，艾卜·哈尼法的弟子们认为，既然叩头是重复的，那么在顺序中考虑重复就不是必需的。与此性质相同的，是马立克的弟子们之间关于忘记在第一拉克尔中诵读《古兰经》开篇章（Umm al-Qur'an）的人的分歧。有人说，该拉克尔不计入（已完成的），应当作为补拜（qada'）来完成；有人说，他应当重新完成整个拜；还有人说，他应当做忘却叩头，以使其拜得以完整。

The reason for the disagreement over this stems from the consideration of sequential order. Those who took it into account in the rak'as and prostrations nullified the prayer. Those who took it into account for prostrations alone nullified the ra&aSy except the last on the analogy of what a follower misses of the prayer of the imam. Those who did not take sequential order into account permitted the prostrations of the (entire) prayer at one time in a single rak^ay especially when they believed that a sequential order is not obligatory in an act that is repeated in each rak^ay that is, in the prostrations, because each rak'a comprises standing, bowing, and prostrating and the prostration is repeated. Thus, the disciples of Abu HanTfa thought that as the prostrations are repeated it is not obligatory to take into account repetition in the sequential order. Of the same nature is a disagreement among the disciples of Malik about the person who forgets to recite the umm al-QuPan in. the first rak'a. It is said that the rak'a is not to be counted (as observed) and is to be performed as qad&\ it is said that he is to repeat the entire prayer, and it is also said, that he is to make prostrations of forgetfulness for making his prayer complete.

根据律法规定的忘记礼（sujūd as-sahw）适用于两种情况：第一，行为或言语在无意中增加或减少；第二，对礼拜中的行为存在疑虑。对于因遗忘而非因疑虑所产生的忘记礼，本文的讨论分为六节。第一节论述忘记礼的裁决（hukm）。第二节论述其在礼拜中的时机。第三节论述使人作忘记礼的行为之种类及行为本身的确定。第四节论述忘记礼的方式。第五节论述忘记礼为必须履行者的人的确定。第六节论述跟随者用以提醒领拜人其遗忘的方式。

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.

他们对遗忘拜（Sujud as-Sahw，遗忘时的叩拜）的性质产生了分歧：它是义务还是逊奈（Sunna，圣行）。沙斐仪（Al-Shafi'i）认为它是逊奈，而艾布·哈尼法（Abu Hanifa）则认为它是义务，但是作为拜功有效的条件之一。马立克（Malik）则作了区分：因遗忘诵词或遗忘某些动作而做的遗忘拜，以及因多做或少做而做的遗忘拜，有所不同。他说，因少做动作而做的遗忘拜是义务的，依他的看法，它是拜功有效的条件之一。这是广为流传的说法。另有传闻称，他也认为因少做而做的遗忘拜是义务，而因多做而做的遗忘拜是recommended（可嘉尚的、推荐的）。

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.

其分歧的原因，源于他们对与此议题相关的先知（愿神的平安与祝福降于他）之行为的解释存在争议，即这些行为是体现义务还是推荐。艾布·哈尼法将先知（愿神的平安与祝福降于他）的行为解释为义务性的，因为依他的原则，这些行为是对某项义务行为的阐明。先知（愿神的平安与祝福降于他）说："你们怎样看见我礼拜，你们就怎样礼拜。"沙斐仪则将其行为解释为体现推荐，并基于类比偏离了该原则的本义。他认为，依大多数学者的看法，叩头并不替代义务，而是替代推荐性的行为；因此，替代非义务之物的行为本身也不能是义务。对马立克而言，他更重视行为而非言语，因为行为构成了拜功的结构，比言语更为关键；换言之，与行为相关的义务多于与言语相关的义务。因此，仿佛他认为行为比言语更具约束力，尽管遗忘叩头只能替代非义务的行为。他对因缺失而行的叩头与因多余而行的叩头所作的区分，依据第二种传述，其基础在于：因缺失而行的叩头被规定为对拜功中所遗漏之行为的补偿，而因多余而行的叩头则如同忏悔，并非替代。

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.

他们对于遗忘拜（sujud al-sahw）应在何时进行存在分歧，共有五种观点。沙斐仪派认为，遗忘拜总是在道别的祝词（salam）之前进行。哈乃斐派主张，遗忘拜总是在道别的祝词之后进行。马立克派作了区分：若遗忘拜是因缺失而作，则应在祝词之前进行；若是因多余而作，则应在祝词之后进行。艾哈迈德·伊本·罕百勒认为，先知ﷺ在祝词之前行遗忘拜的情形，便在祝词之前进行；先知ﷺ在祝词之后行遗忘拜的情形，便在祝词之后进行。除此之外的情形，遗忘拜总是在祝词之前进行。Zahirite派（达哈里派）认为，遗忘拜只适用于先知ﷺ曾行遗忘拜的五种情形。在这些情形之外，如果遗漏的是功修（wajib），则必须进行遗忘拜；如果遗漏的是劝励性的（mustahabb）行为，则行者没有进行遗忘拜的义务。

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.

他们产生分歧的原因，源于一个已确立的事实：先知（愿真主赐予他平安与祝福）有时在念完祝词（salam）之前做叩头礼，有时则在念完之后做。因此，据布海奈的传述已可确定，他说："真主的使者（愿真主赐予他平安与祝福）带领我们礼了两拜，然后起身，没有坐下，众人也跟着他站了起来。待他礼完拜后，他在坐着的时候做了两次叩头。"又据前文已提及的圆臂人（Dhu al-Yadayn）的传述可以确定，他是在两拜之后便念了祝词。那些主张在遗忘叩头（sujud al-sahw）上使用类比的人——我指的是那些把先知（愿真主赐予他平安与祝福）做叩头的情形之裁决，推广到这些真实传述中与之相似的情况上的人——持有三种不同的观点。第一种基于取舍（tarjih）的方法，第二种基于调和（jam'）的方法，第三种则基于在取舍与调和之间进行调和的方法。

The reason for their disagreement stems from the established fact that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) made prostrations at times before salutation and at others after it. Thus, it is established from the tradition of Buhayna, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) led us in praying two rakfas after which he stood up, not taking the sitting posture, and the people stood up with him. When he had performed the prayer, he made two prostrations while still seated”. It is established from the tradition of Dhu al-Yadayn that has preceded where he bad (first) made the salutation from the two rak^as. Those who permitted analogy in the prostrations of forgetfulness—I mean, those who held the extension of the hukm for the occasions on which he (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prostrated to the cases similar to them in these authentic traditions—held three (differing) opinions. The first is based on the method of preference (tarjih) and the second on the method of reconciliation (jam*). The third is based on the method or reconciliation between preference and (original) reconciliation.

凡主张遗忘性叩拜（sujud al-sahw）的学者，无论是因祷告中因遗忘而多做或少做的情况，都一致认为：叩拜是因为遗漏了祷告的“sunan”（逊奈，即圣行），而非因为遗漏了义务（fard），也非因为遗漏了可嘉的行为（raghā'ib，即低于逊奈的行为）。在他们看来，遗漏这一类行为并不需要承担责任，也就是说，如果一个人在祷告中遗忘了其中之一，则无需补救，除非遗漏的次数超过一次。例如，马立克认为，忘记一个“takbir”（念“真主至大”）不需要做遗忘性叩拜，但遗漏这一类行为中的多于一项，则需要做叩拜。 遗漏义务则不能有效，必须加以履行和完成。遗忘义务的后果是重新完整地补做整个祷告，正如在论述何种情况导致重做、何种情况导致补救时所已提及的那样，比如一个人放弃了祷告的某一构成要素。

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.

另一方面,因多余动作而进行的遗忘拜(sujud al-sahw),是因为在义务性功课和逊奈(sunan)中出现了多余的动作。在这一点上,他们之间没有分歧;他们的分歧仅在于:哪些行为是义务,哪些不是;哪些是逊奈,哪些不是;以及什么是逊奈,什么是可嘉的行为(raghiba)。例如读"科努特"(qunut)便是一例。根据马立克的观点,若有人遗漏了科努特,不需要为此叩遗忘拜,因为在他看来它只是可嘉的行为(mandub),低于逊奈的层次;但根据沙斐仪的观点,他则应当叩遗忘拜,因为在他看来它是逊奈。

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.

这一点对你来说并不难理解,因为前面已经讨论过他们关于什么是逊奈(sunna)、什么是义务(farida)、什么是可取之事(raghiba)的分歧。马立克及其门徒认为,即使多出的部分不属于礼拜的范畴,因礼拜中的小过失也须做忽略补过礼(sujud al-sahw)。需要知道的是,在他们看来,逊奈和可取之事都属于推荐(nadb)的范畴。不过,他们的分歧在于,就其看法而言,它们的推荐程度是更高还是更低,即命令中对它们所强调的程度。这与该项功修的周边情况有关。因此,在这一范畴中他们的分歧变得相当大,以至于其中一些人认为,若有意放弃某些逊奈,或在打算放弃它们时仍去做,其裁决(hukm)便会加重,即若是逊奈则变为必须,若是禁止之事则变为罪。这在马立克的门徒中常可见到。因此你会发现,除了达希里派(Zahiriyya)之外,他们一致认为,经常整体放弃逊奈的人是罪人。于是,经常放弃养生礼(witr)或晨礼前的两拜圣行的人,就是败坏者,也是罪人。这就好像有些功修在类别与本质上是义务的,如每日五拜;而有些功修在类别上是义务,在属性上却是逊奈,如养生礼、晨礼前的两拜,以及与之相似的其他逊奈。同样,在他们看来,某些可取之事在类别上是可取的,但在属性上属于逊奈,例如我们从马立克那里转述的关于因多念一次“安拉至大”(takbir)或因遗忘它而须做忽略补过礼的说法。我认为,他们并没有既在类别上又在属性上都属于逊奈的范畴。

他们(法学家)对遗忘补拜(sujud al-sahw)的性质存在分歧。马立克认为，当遗忘补拜在祝词(salam)之后时，其裁决是当事人应当诵念泰舒海胡德(tashahhud)并致祝词。这也是艾卜·哈尼法的观点，因为在他看来，遗忘补拜在各种情况下都是在祝词之后。若遗忘补拜在祝词之前，则当事人只需诵念泰舒海胡德，而拜功的祝词即可作为遗忘补拜的祝词。这是沙斐仪的观点，因为在他看来，此类补拜始终在祝词之前。另有传述称马立克认为，对于在祝词之前的遗忘补拜，不需诵念泰舒海胡德。这也是一群法学家的观点。艾卜·欧麦尔说，在拜功祝词之后的遗忘补拜，其致祝词之法是来自先知ﷺ确立的圣行；至于泰舒海胡德，我无法在可靠的传述中找到其根据。

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.

这种分歧的根源在于学者们对伊本·麦斯欧德传述的真实性存在争议。据该传述，先知（愿主赐福于他并使他平安）说："你们应诵读讲演词（tashahhud），然后作和平礼（salutation）"。此外，还有遗忘之过的叩头（prostrations of forgetfulness）与礼拜末尾两次叩头之间的相似性问题。比较二者的学者并不认为讲演词是必须的，尤其是当二者出现在同一次礼拜之中时。 阿布·伯克尔·伊本·蒙迪尔曾说，法学家们对此问题存在分歧，共有六种观点。第一种观点认为，在这些叩头中既无讲演词，也无和平礼。这是安斯·伊本·马立克、哈桑和阿塔的观点。第二种观点与此相反，认为两者都有，即既有讲演词，也有和平礼。第三种观点认为有讲演词，但没有和平礼。这是哈凯姆、哈马德和纳海仪的观点。第四种观点与此相反，认为有和平礼，但没有讲演词。这是伊本·西林的观点。第五种观点认为，这取决于礼拜者自己：他若愿意，可以诵读讲演词并作和平礼，但并无义务这样做。这一观点出自阿里。第六种观点是艾哈迈德·伊本·哈奈白的观点：如果此人是在和平礼之后叩头，则应诵读讲演词；如果是在和平礼之前叩头，则不应诵读讲演词。这是我们从马立克那里所传述的观点。 阿布·伯克尔说，已有可靠证据表明，先知（愿主赐福于他并使他平安）曾念四次"安拉至大"（takbir），然后作和平礼；但关于他诵读讲演词的真实性，则需要进一步考证。

The reason for this disagreement stems from their dispute over is the authenticity of what has been reported about it in the tradition of Ibn Mascud, that is, that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Recite the tashahhud and then offer the salutation”, and also the semblance between the prostrations of forgetfulness and the last two prostrations of the prayer. Those who compared the two did not make tashahhud obligatory, especially when both were within the same prayer. Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir has said that the jurists differed over this issue and had six opinions. One group said that there is no tashahhud in them and no salutation. This was the opinion of Anas ibn Malik, al-Hasan, and cAt2P. A second group said the opposite of this, that there is tashahhud as well as salutation in them. A third group said that there.is tashahhud, but not salutation. This was the opinion of al-Hakam, Hammad, and al-NakhaH. A fourth group said the opposite of this, that there is salutation in them, but not tashahhud. This is the opinion of Ibn Sirin. The fifth opinion is that it is up to the worshipper; if he likes he may recite the tashahhud and offer the salutation, but he is not obliged to do so. This is related from ApP. The sixth opinion is c that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal that if the person is prostrating after the salutation he is to recite the tashahhud, but if he is prostrating prior to the salutation he is not to recite the tashahhud. This is what we related from Malik. Abu Bakr said that it has been established from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he pronounced a takbir four times and then offered the salutation, but the authentication of his reciting tashahhud needs scrutiny.

他们一致认为,无论是独自礼拜的人还是领拜的伊玛目,做忘记时的叩拜(sujūd as-sahw)都是逊奈。至于跟随伊玛目礼拜时自己忘了的跟随者,是否有义务做这种叩拜,则存在分歧。多数学者认为,伊玛目替跟随者承担忘记的责任;而麦克胡勒(Makhul)的说法则与此不同,他认为跟随者自己忘记时,叩拜是必须的,这是一种偏离常理的观点。

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.

他们产生分歧的原因，在于对礼拜中由伊玛目为跟随者承担的组成部分存在争议。学者们一致认为，如果伊玛目忘记了某些内容，跟随者即使是在忘记发生之后才加入礼拜，也应跟随他做忽略补救的叩拜（sujud al-sahw）。他们的分歧在于：如果跟随者错过了与伊玛目一起礼拜的一部分，那么他应在何时叩拜，以及由谁来做叩拜。 一派法学家认为，他应与伊玛目一起做叩拜，然后起身补完他所错过的部分；无论伊玛目是在缀礼（salam）之前还是之后做叩拜，都应如此。此说为阿塔（ʿAtāʾ）、哈桑·巴士里（al-Hasan al-Basri）、纳赫daʿī（al-Nakhaʿī）、沙阿比（al-Shaʿbī）、艾哈迈德、艾布·萨乌尔（Abu Thawr）以及主张用“意见”（ra'y）的学者所支持。 另一派法学家认为，他应先完成自己的礼拜，然后再做叩拜。此说为伊本·西林（Ibn Sirin）和伊斯哈格（Ishaq）所持。 第三派法学家认为，如果伊玛目在缀礼之前做叩拜，他应与伊玛目一起叩拜；如果伊玛目在缀礼之后做叩拜，他则应完成自己的礼拜，然后再做叩拜。此说为马立克（Malik）、莱斯（al-Layth）和沙斐仪（al-Shafiʿī）所支持。 第四派法学家认为，他应先与伊玛目一起做叩拜，然后在完成礼拜之后再做第二次叩拜。此说为沙斐仪所持。

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.

分歧的原因在于他们对哪一种做法更好、更有功德的争论:是在与伊玛目同时进行(忘记礼的)叩拜更好,还是在完成自己的拜功之后再叩拜更好?他们似乎都同意跟随伊玛目是瓦吉布的,因为先知(愿主的赞颂与祝福降临于他)说过:"设立伊玛目就是为了让人跟随他。"但他们在跟随者的叩拜时间上存在分歧:是以其固定规定的时间即自己拜功结束时为准,还是以伊玛目叩拜的时间为准。 那些主张将跟随者的行为与伊玛目的行为相结合,胜过在固定叩拜时间进行,并认为行为须真正同步是跟随的条件的人说,即使跟随者没有在规定的叩拜时间进行,他也应当与伊玛目一同叩拜。那些主张遵循规定叩拜时间的人说,他应当将叩拜推迟到自己拜功结束时。那些认为两种形式都是瓦吉布的人则要求他叩拜两次,但这一说法较为薄弱。

他们一致认为,提醒在礼拜中忘记事情的人的方法是念赞词(tasbih),即说"Subhan Allah"(赞颂安拉超绝万物)。然而,这一方法只适用于男性,因为有圣训确立自先知ﷺ,他说:"我为何看到你们频繁拍手(tasfiq)?凡在礼拜中遇到什么事情的人,应当念赞词赞颂安拉,因为他一念赞词,就会引起注意。而拍手是女性的做法。"

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”.

！他们在女性的情况下存在分歧。马利克及一些法学家认为，塔斯比哈（tasbih）对男性和女性都适用。沙斐仪及一些法学家认为，塔斯比哈是男性的，而塔斯菲格（tasfiq，即用右手掌拍打左手背）是女性的。

! 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.

他们之间产生分歧的原因，在于对先知（愿主赐他平安和祝福）所说的“击掌是为女性而设”这句话的理解不同。那些认为这句话的意思是，忘记时女性的规定是击掌而非念赞词的人，也就是字面的含义，他们说女性应当击掌，而不应念赞词。那些从中理解出击掌对女性有所减免的人则说，男性与女性在念赞词方面是平等的。但这种观点有一定的弱点，因为它在没有证据的情况下偏离了字面含义，除非通过类比男性的情形来推及女性。而在礼拜方面，女性的规定常常与男性不同，这一事实削弱了这种类比。

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.

关于因怀疑而须行忘记叩拜（sujud al-sahw）的问题，法学家们存在分歧，形成三种观点。对于一个在礼拜中怀疑自己所做的拜数、不知道已拜了一拜、两拜、三拜还是四拜的人，情况如下：一派法学家认为，他应以确定的最少数目为基础来完成前面的礼拜，不应去推测，礼拜结束后再行忘记叩拜。这是马立克、沙斐仪和达乌德的观点。艾布·哈尼法则认为，如果这是礼拜中第一次出现这种怀疑，他的礼拜无效；但如果怀疑反复出现，他应当进行推测，并依据内心占优的确信来行动，然后在道赛琳之后行忘记叩拜。另一派法学家认为，怀疑之人既不应依据确定的把握，也不应进行推测，只需行忘记叩拜即可。

With respect to performing the prostrations of forgetfulness that are occasioned by doubt, the jurists disagreed—holding three opinions—about the case of a person who feels doubt about (whether) his his prayer (was properly observed) and does not know how many rak^as he has offered: whether one, two, three, or four rak^as. A group of jurists said that he is to base the preceding part of the prayer on certainty, which is the least (number) for he is not to estimate, and after completing the prayer accordingly he should make the prostrations of forgetfulness. This is the opinion of Malik, al-ShaficT, and Dawud. Abu Hamfa said that if this is the first occasion (of doubt in the prayer) his prayer becomes invalid, but if it recurs he is to make an estimation and act on the basis of the preponderant conviction in his mind (about the number), and then he is to make the prostrations of forgetfulness following the salutation: Another group of jurists said that if the person is in doubt he is neither to have recourse to certain conviction nor to estimation, but is simply obliged to make the prostrations of forgetfulness.