本主题的讨论分为五个部分：礼拜中叩头（sujūd）的裁决；必须叩头的次数，即人应当为之叩头的情形；可以叩头的时间；负有叩头义务的人；以及叩头的方式。

The discussion of this topic is covered in five sections: the hukm of the prostrations; the number of prostrations that are obligatory, that is, those (occasions) for which the person is to prostrate; the times during which he may prostrate; the person who is under an obligation to prostrate; and the description of the prostrations.

关于诵读礼拜（sujud al-tilawa）的裁决，阿布·哈尼法及其门徒认为它是必须的（wajib）。马立克与沙斐仪则认为它是作为逊奈（sunna）规定的，并非必须。他们之间产生分歧的原因，在于他们对命令形式的要求礼拜的经文，以及传述中表达命令之意的圣训，其含义是什么存在争议。例如，至尊真主的经文：“当至仁主的启示向他们诵读时，他们便俯伏叩拜，并且哭泣。”（《古兰经》19:58）其中的措辞应当理解为义务还是劝勉。阿布·哈尼法依其表面含义，将其理解为义务；而马立克与沙斐仪则遵循圣门弟子的见解，因为他们最精通律法命令的含义。 据此，有传述称：欧麦尔·本·罕塔卜在一个星期五诵读了《麦尔彦章》（Surat al-Sajda）。他走下讲台并俯身叩拜，众人也随他叩拜。到了下一个星期五，他再次诵读此章，众人也准备叩拜，于是他说：“等一等！等一等！真主并未为我们规定此事，除非我们自愿去做。”他们说，这件事发生在众圣门弟子面前，且未传出他们中任何人有异议。他们是最懂得律法精髓的人。那些在没有其他相反证据时依赖圣门弟子见解的人，以此作为其观点的依据。 沙斐仪的门徒则以宰德·本·萨比特的圣训为据，他说：“我曾为使者（愿真主赐予他平安与祝福）诵读《古兰经》。有一次我诵读了《朝觐章》（Surat al-Hajj），他没有叩拜，我们也没有叩拜。” 这些法学家还以这样一则传述为据：“先知（愿主的平安与祝福归于他）在诵读《穆法萨勒》章时不做叩拜”，同时也以他确实在诵读这些章时做了叩拜的传述为据；将二者调和的结论是，这些叩拜并非必须。他们每一方都报告了自己所见的情形，即：说他做了叩拜的人，与说他没有做叩拜的人，各自如实传述。

About the hukm of the prostrations of recitation, Abu HanTfa and his disciples said that they are obligatory. Malik and al-ShafFT said that they are prescribed as a sunna and are not obligatory. The reason for disagreement arises from their dispute about the implication of the commands requiring prostrations and the traditions that convey the meaning of commands. For example, whether the (following) words of the Exalted, “When the revelations of the Beneficent were recited unto them, they fell down, adoring and weeping”,166 are to be interpreted as an obligation or a recommendation. Abu HanTfa interpreted them in their apparent meaning of obligation, while Malik and al-Shafi T followed the c (interpretation of) the Companions, for they were the ones best grounded in the meaning of the commands of law. Thus, it has been established that TJmar ibn al-Khattab recited surat al-Sajda on a Friday. He descended (from the pulpit) and made a prostration, and the people prostrated with him. On the next Friday, he recited it again and the people prepared for the,prostrations, so he said, “Wait! Wait! Allah has not prescribed it for us, unless we want to do it”. They said that this occurred in the presence of the Companions, and no disagreement was transmitted from any of them. They were the ones who best knew the essence of the law. This is used in support of that view by those who rely on the opinion of a Companion when there is no other conflicting evidence. The disciples of al-ShafiT argued on the basis of the tradition of Zayd ibn al-Thabit, who said, “I used to read out the Qur’an for the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). Once I recited sural al-Hajj and he did not prostrate, and^ neither did we”. These jurists also argued on the basis of the report “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) did not prostrate during (the recitation of) al-Mufassal surahs”, and also on1 the reports that he did prostrate during their recitation; a reconciliation between these implies that the prostrations are not obligatory. Each one of them reported what he saw, that is, those who said that he prostrated and those who said that he did not.