[Chooriwrocaxz]

I remember having read a post long time ago - from Mufti Husain if I remember correctly - stating that if the Imam makes something which is valid in his own madhhab, but that for the madhhab of the follower breaks the prayer (or break's one wudu'), the Salah of the follower wouldn't be valid.

So, if a Shafi'i imam bleeds before leading Salah, and doesn't take a new wudu' (since for Shafi'is bleeding doesn't break wudu'), the Salah of a Hanafi follower wouldn't be valid.

Or if a Hanbali makes masah on thin socks who are not adapt according to Hanafi standards, again the Salah of a Hanafi follower wouldn't be valid.

But I have read accounts of great Hanafi Ulama' (possibly even Imam Muhammad (ra) or Imam Abu Yusuf (ra)!) praying behind imams of other madhahib who did something who invalidated their prayers according to the Hanafi madhhab but not according to the Imam's madhhab, and still considering their prayer completely fine and valid..

Also, some days ago I've read an account of Sahaba praying behind each other even in presence of ikhtilaf about tahara issue (again about bleeding), but still considering their prayer valid..

I'd like to have some clarification,

[JohnMitchel]

As far as I heard from Hanafi jursits, there is no objection in praying behind an Imam of a different madhhab. That is because despite our insistence on adherence to the school of one Imam, we generally believe that all four of them are correct with a proper basis in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

والله اعلم

[corsar-caribean]

As far as I heard from Hanafi jursits, there is no objection in praying behind an Imam of a different madhhab. That is because despite our insistence on adherence to the school of one Imam, we generally believe that all four of them are correct with a proper basis in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

والله اعلم

here in the states, I would be pleased if the Imam followed a madhab period..

but seriously .. brother Umar raises a good question .

[Uhmavano]

I remember having read a post long time ago - from Mufti Husain if I remember correctly - stating that if the Imam makes something which is valid in his own madhhab, but that for the madhhab of the follower breaks the prayer (or break's one wudu'), the Salah of the follower wouldn't be valid.

So, if a Shafi'i imam bleeds before leading Salah, and doesn't take a new wudu' (since for Shafi'is bleeding doesn't break wudu'), the Salah of a Hanafi follower wouldn't be valid.

Or if a Hanbali makes masah on thin socks who are not adapt according to Hanafi standards, again the Salah of a Hanafi follower wouldn't be valid.

But I have read accounts of great Hanafi Ulama' (possibly even Imam Muhammad (ra) or Imam Abu Yusuf (ra)!) praying behind imams of other madhahib who did something who invalidated their prayers according to the Hanafi madhhab but not according to the Imam's madhhab, and still considering their prayer completely fine and valid..

Also, some days ago I've read an account of Sahaba praying behind each other even in presence of ikhtilaf about tahara issue (again about bleeding), but still considering their prayer valid..

I'd like to have some clarification,

Many Imam's accommodate the followers. Maliki scholars have said that a Maliki Imam should recite the Bismillah out loud so that the Salah of Shafi'i followers would be valid even though it would normally be makruh in the madhab.

[RogerButton33]

The problem here arises when we say that they are all valid ways, and we then go on to say that prayed behind such and such a person is void. Do you seriously think that Imam Shafi'i while holding the opinion that Basmala is Fard in Fatiha wouldn't pray behind Imam Malik who beleived it is Makruh. As long as it's opinions based on sound understanding and knowledge, and not whims and desires.

Yes we may find such fatwas in some books, but that doesn't mean they are necessarily correct. Just as major Imams have said that one can't marry outside the school etc. Such extremism wasn't uncommon at certain times in Islamic history. Let us not repeat their mistakes.

[Uhmavano]

Just as major Imams have said that one can't marry outside the school etc. Such extremism wasn't uncommon at certain times in Islamic history.

Such claims require proof.

[dianakroshXX]

Such claims require proof.

What I have read, very briefly, and may or may not be accurate, is that some Hanafis, in the Medieval period, said that one could not marry a Shafi'i. This might have been due to a bit of fanaticism, but its reasoning was grounded in something concrete.

Hanafis, who mostly follow Maturidi aqeedah, believe that eman remains constant: Either you believe in Allah, the books He sent, etc. or you don't. What increases and decreases is the quality of faith, yaqeen in this belief, etc. Asharis, on the other hand, mostly Shafii's in question, believe that eman itself can increase and decrease in and of itself. Thus, when asked if one is a believer, a Hanafi following Maturidi aqeedah would say, "Yes, I am a believer." On the other hand, a common Shafi'i answer to such a question would be, "I am a believer, inshaAllah." Certain Hanafis said that through Shafi'is saying "InshaAllah," in response to a question about being a believer, they vocalized that they were unsure of their belief, thus negating their eman, and since they vocalized it, their Islam, thus making it impossible to apply Islamic laws to them in this life, and subsequently making it impossible for a Muslim to wed them.

Also, the sahaba and tabi'een differed in the ways they prayed. Not praying behind someone else due to fiqh differences had no basis amongst them.

[swwatch]

What I have read, very briefly, and may or may not be accurate, is that some Hanafis, in the Medieval period, said that one could not marry a Shafi'i. This might have been due to a bit of fanaticism, but its reasoning was grounded in something concrete.

Hanafis, who mostly follow Maturidi aqeedah, believe that eman remains constant: Either you believe in Allah, the books He sent, etc. or you don't. What increases and decreases is the quality of faith, yaqeen in this belief, etc. Asharis, on the other hand, mostly Shafii's in question, believe that eman itself can increase and decrease in and of itself. Thus, when asked if one is a believer, a Hanafi following Maturidi aqeedah would say, "Yes, I am a believer." On the other hand, a common Shafi'i answer to such a question would be, "I am a believer, inshaAllah." Certain Hanafis said that through Shafi'is saying "InshaAllah," in response to a question about being a believer, they vocalized that they were unsure of their belief, thus negating their eman, and since they vocalized it, their Islam, thus making it impossible to apply Islamic laws to them in this life, and subsequently making it impossible for a Muslim to wed them.

Also, the sahaba and tabi'een differed in the ways they prayed. Not praying behind someone else due to fiqh differences had no basis amongst them.

What you relate, if true, isn't madhhab related at all, and based purely on Aqeedah.

[Frdsdx26]

The problem here arises when we say that they are all valid ways, and we then go on to say that prayed behind such and such a person is void. Do you seriously think that Imam Shafi'i while holding the opinion that Basmala is Fard in Fatiha wouldn't pray behind Imam Malik who beleived it is Makruh. As long as it's opinions based on sound understanding and knowledge, and not whims and desires.

Yes we may find such fatwas in some books, but that doesn't mean they are necessarily correct. Just as major Imams have said that one can't marry outside the school etc. Such extremism wasn't uncommon at certain times in Islamic history. Let us not repeat their mistakes.

Assalamu aliakum,

It is a misconception that all the ways are totally valid. As clearly mentioned by Mufti Abdur Rahman in Fiqh al Imam (I believe quoting Mufti Taqi Usmani) that there is only one valid opinion regarding every issue in the sight of Allah and no one madhab is totally correct. It is also mentioned in the book that the position of every madhab is "We are right with the possibility of being wrong and the others are wrong with the possibility of being right" - and it is because of this possibility that there is no condemnation.

[Uhmavano]

Assalamu aliakum,

It is a misconception that all the ways are totally valid. As clearly mentioned by Mufti Abdur Rahman in Fiqh al Imam (I believe quoting Mufti Taqi Usmani) that there is only one valid opinion regarding every issue in the sight of Allah and no one madhab is totally correct. It is also mentioned in the book that the position of every madhab is "We are right with the possibility of being wrong and the others are wrong with the possibility of being right" - and it is because of this possibility that there is no condemnation.

As-Salamu Alaykum,

I have the book and in one place, the Shaykh says that some Sahaba were known to pray with Sadl. This is quote interesting. InshAllah I will give you the page number. Who would be correct in this case?

[gunhijala]

I believe the issue is not about following the imam of another madhhab. The issue is when the imam does something that invalidate salah of the ma'mum of another madhhab but not the imam's, as given in the example above (i.e. bleeding while praying or when you see a Hanbali imam wipe wudhu' on socks).

[Frdsdx26]

As-Salamu Alaykum,

I have the book and in one place, the Shaykh says that some Sahaba were known to pray with Sadl. This is quote interesting. InshAllah I will give you the page number. Who would be correct in this case?

Assalamu alaikum,

In the case of halaal and haraam where there is a difference of opinion there is only one correct answer. For example lizards and crabs are either halaal or haraam. Either Hanafis or Shafis are correct and one of them is certainly wrong in these issues.

As for issue of preference as to what is more superior - then there is only one position which is more superior. In these cases there is acknowledgment that both were done but one is more superior but the other is not incorrect. Like the position of sadl (which I assume refers to having the hands on the side) - either sadl is superior or folding the hands is superior - one of them and not both - but both were done.

[Uhmavano]

Assalamu alaikum,

In the case of halaal and haraam where there is a difference of opinion there is only one correct answer. For example lizards and crabs are either halaal or haraam. Either Hanafis or Shafis are correct and one of them is certainly wrong in these issues.

As for issue of preference as to what is more superior - then there is only one position which is more superior. In these cases there is acknowledgment that both were done but one is more superior but the other is not incorrect. Like the position of sadl (which I assume refers to having the hands on the side) - either sadl is superior or folding the hands is superior - one of them and not both - but both were done.

Jazak Allah khayr bro,

Makes sense. Keep me in your dua's

[Frdsdx26]

Assalamu aliakum,

This issue of praying behind someone of the other madhab is in my opinion especially delicate in the Hanafi madhab. This is because in the Hanafi madhab the prayer of the follower is linked to the prayer of the imam in every way. For example the follower cannot pray his fardh behind an imam who is praying his sunnah. There are many such examples. Such is not the case with other madhabs as far as I know. For example in the Shafi fiqh if someone is praying nafl a follower who wants to pray fardh can come and join him. It is because of this that I think that if the Imam's prayer is invalidated (according to the Hanafi follower), the follower's prayer would be invalidated as well.

However only if a person sees and is certain that the imam's wudu or prayer was invalidated, then only should he consider it not proper. Otherwise one should not assume. If one assumes "what if the imam's wudu is invalid according to my madhab" then it is equally possible to assume "what if the imam did not do wudu at all" - and if we think like this we cannot pray behind anyone - which does not make any sense.

[Frdsdx26]

Jazak Allah khayr bro,

Makes sense. Keep me in your dua's

Assalamu alaikum brother,
One important note though: no madhab is completely correct. So even though for the sake of following ulema and scholars we must assume our madhab is correct - due to taqlid - but in reality all madhabs have some mistakes. We should not think our madhab is superior or something. Imam Ghazzali said in Ihya that this is one of the barriers to spiritual progress.

[gunhijala]

Assalamu aliakum,

This issue of praying behind someone of the other madhab is in my opinion especially delicate in the Hanafi madhab. This is because in the Hanafi madhab the prayer of the follower is linked to the prayer of the imam in every way. For example the follower cannot pray his fardh behind an imam who is praying his sunnah. There are many such examples. Such is not the case with other madhabs as far as I know. For example in the Shafi fiqh if someone is praying nafl a follower who wants to pray fardh can come and join him. It is because of this that I think that if the Imam's prayer is invalidated (according to the Hanafi follower), the follower's prayer would be invalidated as well.

true. because in Shafi'i, all recite their own fatihah but Hanafis don't so they depend on the recitation of the Imam. However I'm not sure if the Salah (for Shafi'i) is valid if the imam's Salah is invalid - need to check with more knowledgeable brothers.

But if the case of Imam passing wind in the middle of the Salah, at least in Shafi'i, the one behind him can go to the front and continue the salah as the Imam (also need to recheck this).

والله اعلم

[swwatch]

but in reality all madhabs have some mistakes.

That does not make any sense bro. If the 'ulama in a madhhab knew the madhhab's "mistakes", they would obviously correct it.

[Frdsdx26]

But if the case of Imam passing wind in the middle of the Salah, at least in Shafi'i, the one behind him can go to the front and continue the salah as the Imam (also need to recheck this).

والله اعلم

I am pretty sure this can be done in Hanafi fiqh too as long as I believe the imam did not pass wind intentionally but it escaped without him wanting to - which is usually the case - I mean no one intentionally breaks his wudu in salaat.

[Frdsdx26]

That does not make any sense bro. If the 'ulama in a madhhab knew the madhhab's "mistakes", they would obviously correct it.

Assalamu alaikum,

According to the Hanafi ulema there are no mistakes in Hanafi madhab - and according to the scholars of each madhab there are no mistakes in their madhabs. But in reality there could be and only Allah knows.

For example are crabs halaal or haraam. Hanafis say haraam but everyone else says halaal. One of the groups is correct and the other incorrect. According to each they are correct but according to Allah there is only one correct answer.

As long as we followed knowledgeable scholars Allah will not take us to task for following mujtahids and nor will the mujtahids be taken to task if they were sincere. There are hadith regarding this - for example it says more or less if a mujtahid makes correct ijtihad he gets two rewards (for ijtihad and being correct) and if a mujtahid makes wrong ijtihad he gets one reward (for making ijtihad) (but no sin for being wrong).

[Uhmavano]

Assalamu alaikum,

According to the Hanafi ulema there are no mistakes in Hanafi madhab - and according to the scholars of each madhab there are no mistakes in their madhabs. But in reality there could be and only Allah knows.

For example are crabs halaal or haraam. Hanafis say haraam but everyone else says halaal. One of the groups is correct and the other incorrect. According to each they are correct but according to Allah there is only one correct answer.

As long as we followed knowledgeable scholars Allah will not take us to task for following mujtahids and nor will the mujtahids be taken to task if they were sincere. There are hadith regarding this - for example it says more or less if a mujtahid makes correct ijtihad he gets two rewards (for ijtihad and being correct) and if a mujtahid makes wrong ijtihad he gets one reward (for making ijtihad) (but no sin for being wrong).

Absolutely. I remember reading in the Guiding Helper that even if one makes some mistakes InshAllah Allah will forgive him. It goes back to the Hadith of Rasul Allah [SallAllahu alayhi wa Sallam] about a scholar getting 1 reward for making a mistake and more for getting a ruling right. Allahu Aalim.