What is the ruling on the follower (*maʾmūm*) reciting Sūrat al-Fātiḥah behind the imam?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
In our school of Islamic thought, the Shāfiʿī school, reciting al-Fātiḥah is obligatory in every rakʿah of the prayer for the imam, the follower (maʾmūm), and the one praying individually (munfarid), because it is one of the pillars (arkān) of the prayer. Whoever does not perform it, his prayer is invalid, whether the prayer is silent (sirriyyah) or audible (jahriyyah), based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): “The prayer of the one who does not recite the Opening of the Book (Fātiḥat al-Kitāb) is invalid.” Agreed upon.
It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik, one of the books of the Shāfiʿī school: “He recites al-Fātiḥah in every rakʿah, whether he is the imam, the follower, or the individual worshipper.”
The jurists of the other schools hold a different opinion, which was previously explained in Fatwa no. (
3169); please refer to it. And Allah Almighty knows best.
The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is required of a traveler or a sick person if they broke their fast and then their excuse ceased?
If a traveler settles or a sick person recovers after having broken their fast, it is recommended for them to refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, but it is not obligatory.
Is it permissible to fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for the missed fasts of Ramadan?
● If a person missed fasts due to a valid excuse, they may fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for Ramadan fasts, because qada (makeup fasts) in this case can be delayed, while the six days of Shawwal must be observed within Shawwal.
● However, if a person missed fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up for the missed fasts immediately after Eid, before fasting the six days of Shawwal. If they fast the six days first, it is valid, but they must still make up for the missed Ramadan fasts afterward.
It is also permissible to combine the intention of qada (makeup fasts) and the six days of Shawwal in one fast. However, it is better to fast them separately, as this increases the reward and avoids scholarly disagreement regarding combining intentions.
