Islamic Fiqh > Prayer > Group prayer and the rules of the imam > The imam's integrity, sound reason and maturity
Contents
Updated on 25 September 2026 at 3:23 PM
This part belongs to the full section: All sections of this part.
A continuation of the fiqh study on congregational prayer and the imam: after discussing the sinful imam, this chapter reviews the other personal qualities required of the imam, namely sound reason, maturity, being male, the ability to recite and the ability to perform the pillars of prayer. It then deals with the cases in which the imam leads the prayer while in a state of ritual impurity, praying behind a sick imam who sits, the ranking of those entitled to lead, and the question of taking payment for leading the prayer. The positions of the 4 schools are given with their classical references and the hadiths on which each view rests.
Those who require integrity rely on the general scope of the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) statement: "Let the people be led by the one who recites their Book best." They excepted no flagrant sinner (fasiq) in favor of an upright man, and invoking a general wording outside its intended subject is a weak proof. Other jurists distinguished between a sin affecting the conditions of the prayer's validity and a sin concerning matters outside the prayer, on the basis that the imam is only required for his own prayer to be valid (Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/204).
The jurists then agree that the imam must possess reason. The imamate of the drunkard is therefore invalid, as is that of the bound madman, or the madman in the midst of his fit. The reason is the invalidity of their own prayer for themselves, upon which the prayer of others cannot be built. As for the one with intermittent fits, his imamate is valid during his lucid intervals (al-Tahawi on Maraqi al-Falah, 157; Ma'ani al-Athar, 1/490; Radd al-Muhtar, 1/550; Hashiyat al-Adawi, 1/377; al-Thamar al-Dani, 1/148; Jawahir al-Iklil, 78; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/475-476).
The jurists differ concerning the child who has not reached puberty although he can recite: is the prayer behind him valid? According to the majority of jurists, namely the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis within the school, valid imamate in the obligatory prayer requires an adult imam: the imamate of a discerning minor for an adult is therefore not valid in their view. Imamate is a state of perfection, and the child does not belong to the realm of perfection; he does not lead men, like the woman.
The imam is a guarantor and the muezzin is held in trust: O Allah, guide the imams and forgive the muezzins.Authentic hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (517) and others
The Shafi'is and Imam Ahmad in one narration hold that maturity is not a condition of imamate: the imamate of the discerning minor is therefore valid. Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote: "Every child whose prayer is valid has a valid imamate, outside the Friday prayer, without disagreement among us; regarding Friday there are 2 views, the sounder being validity", by virtue of the general scope of the Prophet's statement: "Let the people be led by the one among them who recites the Book of Allah best" (reported by Muslim, 673), which includes the child, and by the hadith of Amr ibn Salama al-Jarmi.
When the time of prayer comes, let one of you call the adhan and let the one among you with the most Quran lead you. They searched, and none knew more than I, for I used to recite what I learned from the caravans; so they placed me in front of them although I was 6 or 7 years old.Reported by al-Bukhari (4051)
Since the child is thus permitted to call the men to prayer, they may take him as their imam, like the adult. The scholars point out, however, that the adult has greater title than the child, even if the child recites better or is more versed in jurisprudence, since being led by an adult is valid by consensus. That is why it is explicitly reported in al-Buwayti that being led by a child is disliked.
In supererogatory prayers, such as the tarawih, the imamate of a discerning minor for an adult is valid according to the majority of jurists: Malikis, Shafi'is, Hanbalis in one view, and some Hanafis. It does not result in building a strong act upon a weak one, and the supererogatory prayer admits leniency; that is why the congregation is formed through him in this case. The Hanbalis in one narration, which is the choice adopted among the Hanafis, hold on the contrary that the discerning minor may never lead an adult: the child's supererogatory prayer is inferior to the adult's, since it entails no make-up if annulled, and a strong act is not built upon a weak one. As for a discerning minor leading his like, it is permitted in the 5 prayers and others, according to all jurists (Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 1/140; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 1/380; al-Mabsut, 2/149; Ma'ani al-Athar, 1/494; Radd al-Muhtar, 1/550; Fath al-Qadir, 1/310-311; al-Tahawi, 157; al-Ishraf ala nukat masa'il al-khilaf, 1/368, no. 284; Jawahir al-Iklil, 1/78; al-Sharh al-saghir, 1/288; Tafsir al-Qurtubi, 1/353; Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/204; al-Umm, 1/166; Kifayat al-akhyar, 179; al-Thamar al-Dani, 1/148; Hashiyat al-Adawi, 1/377; al-Majmu, 5/326, 231; Nihayat al-muhtaj, 2/168; al-Mughni, 2/438-439; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/480; al-Insaf, 2/266; Fath al-Bari, 2/217; Nayl al-awtar, 3/203).
The jurists of the 4 schools and others agree that being male is a condition for leading men in the obligatory prayer. A woman's imamate over men is therefore not valid in the obligatory prayer. The Prophet's statement "Keep them back where Allah has kept them back" amounts to a prohibition of praying behind them; Jabir reports from the Prophet: "Let no woman lead a man in prayer" (weak hadith: reported by Ibn Majah, 1081, and al-Bayhaqi, 390/171), and a woman's imamate over men involves a temptation linked to her person.
The first text is reported by Abd al-Razzaq in the Musannaf (3/5115) as a statement stopped at Ibn Mas'ud; al-Ajluni cites it in Kashf al-Khafa (1/69, no. 156) and reports from the commentary on al-Hidaya that its elevation to the Prophet is not established, so it is safer to regard it as a statement of Ibn Mas'ud; Ibn Hajar mentions it in Fath al-Bari (1/294) as reported at a stop on Ibn Mas'ud, with a chain he declares authentic. Ibn Hazm transmits the consensus on the prohibition: "They agreed that a woman does not lead men while knowing she is a woman; if they do so, their prayer is invalid by consensus" (Maratib al-Ijma, 27). Imam Ibn Hubayra (may Allah have mercy on him) similarly wrote: "They agreed that a woman may not lead men in the obligatory prayers" (al-Ifsah, 1/133).
The jurists differ, however, on her leading men in the tarawih alone, and the majority, namely the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis within the school, forbid it. Al-Nawawi wrote: our companions agreed that neither an adult man nor a child may pray behind a woman, as reported by Qadi Abu al-Tayyib and al-Abdari; neither does the hermaphrodite pray behind a woman, nor a hermaphrodite behind a hermaphrodite, as the author mentioned; a woman's prayer behind a hermaphrodite, however, is valid. Restricting the prohibition of a woman leading men to the obligatory prayer would be inaccurate: it covers the obligatory prayer, the tarawih and all supererogatory prayers. This is our school and that of the majority of scholars of the early and later generations (may Allah have mercy on them); al-Bayhaqi reported it from the 7 jurists of Medina among the successors, and it is the doctrine of Malik, Abu Hanifa, Sufyan, Ahmad and Dawud. Abu Thawr, al-Muzani and Ibn Jarir held that the prayer of men behind her is valid, as reported by Qadi Abu al-Tayyib and al-Abdari. Shaykh Abu Hamid stated that the doctrine of all the jurists is the invalidity of men's prayer behind her, with the exception of Abu Thawr, and Allah knows best (al-Majmu, 5/338).
Imam Ahmad, in a narration attributed to him, allows a woman to lead men in the tarawih on condition that she stands behind them and prays behind them. Al-Insaf (2/263-264) reports that a woman's imamate over men is not valid, this being the madhhab unconditionally; another narration makes it valid in the supererogatory; a third makes it valid in the tarawih explicitly, and this is the more widespread among the early scholars. Al-Zarkashi wrote that Ahmad's explicit statement and the choice of most of his companions is that she may lead them in the tarawih. Ibn Qudama reports from some of Ahmad's companions the permission for a woman to lead men in the tarawih while remaining behind them, relying on Umm Waraqa bint Abdallah ibn al-Harith, for whom the Messenger of Allah appointed a muezzin who called for her, and whom he ordered to lead the prayer of the people of her house, a hadith of general import covering men and women alike.
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) appointed a muezzin for her who called the adhan for her, and ordered her to lead the prayer of the inhabitants of her house.Hadith judged hasan: reported by Abu Dawud (592), al-Daraqutni (1/403) and al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (3/130)
Ibn Qudama replies that this hadith only permitted her to lead the women of the people of her house, an addition reported by al-Daraqutni that must be accepted; and even without that addition, the report would have to be restricted in this way, because the permission concerned the obligatory prayers, as shown by the appointment of a muezzin for her, whereas the call to prayer is legislated only for the obligatory prayers, and there is no disagreement that she does not lead men in the obligatory prayers. To further restrict the permission to the tarawih and require her to stand behind them would be an arbitrary ruling contrary to the principles without any proof; and even if it were established for Umm Waraqa, it would be a permission specific to her (al-Mughni, 2/414; al-Mubdi, 2/72; al-Insaf, 2/263-264; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/479; al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, 1/58; Majmu al-Fatawa, 23/248; al-Taj wal-Iklil, 2/92; al-Fawakih al-Dawani, 1/205; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/22; Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/204; al-Majmu, 5/338; al-Ifsah, 1/210; Kifayat al-akhyar, 180; Maratib al-Ijma, 27).
Al-Zarkashi also writes that a woman may lead neither a man nor an ambiguous hermaphrodite, based on the hadith of Jabir: "Let no woman lead a man in prayer" (reported by Ibn Majah); the hermaphrodite may be regarded as a man and may lead a woman, as al-Khiraqi later stated explicitly. These words cover the obligatory and the supererogatory; for the obligatory there is no dispute; as for the supererogatory, al-Khiraqi's words also appear to indicate prohibition, a narration reported by Ibn Abi Musa, which is the choice of Abu al-Khattab and Abu Muhammad, applying the generality of the hadith; but Ahmad's explicit statement in al-Marrudhi's narration, which is the choice of most of the companions, is that she may lead them in the tarawih while remaining behind them.
It is also reported that Umm Waraqa asked the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): "I pray, and the inhabitants of my house and my freed slaves pray with me in my prayer; among them are men and women who pray following my recitation although they have no Quran." He said: "Bring the men forward, stand with the women, and they will pray following your prayer." She was proficient in the recitation of the Quran and asked the Prophet for permission to appoint a muezzin in her house, which he granted while ordering her to lead the prayer of the inhabitants of her house (reported by al-Marrudhi with his chain, then by Abu Dawud).
Al-Zarkashi derives from it the conditions of this dispensation: that she be proficient in recitation and that her companions be unable to read or know only the Fatiha or some short passage with her. The Qadi holds, where there is difference of opinion, that her imamate is permitted only for the recitation, not for the rest of the prayer, relying on what Abu Talib reported from him: a woman leads a man while she recites; when she recites, he bows and bows with her; this is in the voluntary prayer, not the obligatory. The Qadi explains: the man bowed before her, which shows that he is imam for that, since such is the object of the dispensation. It remains to ask whether the other voluntary prayers follow the status of the tarawih by analogy, as appears in Abu Talib's narration, or whether this is specific to the tarawih, as appears in al-Marrudhi's narration; the Qadi's choice for ordinary voluntary prayers rests on the need to listen to the Quran in prayer: 2 views exist (Sharh al-Zarkashi, 1/239).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote that the Sunna explicitly stated in the hadith of Umm Waraqa al-Ansariyya is that a woman leads men when necessary, as in the night prayers of Ramadan, if she recites and they do not, and that she stands behind them: a woman does not stand in the row of men, nor in front of them (Jami al-Masa'il, 1/92).
As for a woman leading women, the scholars differ on its validity. The Malikis require the imam to be male: a woman therefore leads neither men nor women, whether in the obligatory or the supererogatory prayer, since imamate falls under guardianship. It is established from the Prophet: "A people will never prosper who entrust their authority to a woman"; and whoever cannot be an imam for men, such as the madman and the child, cannot be one for women (al-Ishraf, 1/370, no. 286; al-Tawdih, 1/456; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/22).
The majority of jurists, namely the Hanafis, Shafi'is, Hanbalis and al-Lakhmi among the Malikis, allow a woman to lead women, relying on the hadith of Umm Waraqa quoted above. The Hanafis and Imam Ahmad in one narration dislike it for them, however, because it necessarily involves abandoning a duty or a recommendation: the adhan and iqama are disliked for them, as is her standing in front of them; so when women pray in congregation behind a woman, she stands in the middle of them. Ibn Qudama states that no disagreement is known on this among those who allow it.
Covering herself is indeed recommended for her, so stretching out in prostration is not recommended for her, and her position in the middle of the row is more concealing, since she is thus screened on both sides; hence this position was recommended for her, as for the one who prays naked: if he prayed in front of them, its validity is possible, since it is a place of standing in general, which was also the place of standing for men; but it may not be valid, since she contradicted her own place of standing, like a man who contradicts his (al-Mughni, 2/416-417; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 1/372; al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, 1/85; al-Sharh al-saghir, 1/285; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/22; al-Hawi al-kabir, 2/356; al-Majmu, 5/339; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/479; al-Insaf, 2/265).
Al-Lakhmi wrote: "As for her leading women, the correct position is that it is valid from the outset in the absence of a man to lead them, and it is better than each of them praying alone; it is disliked when a man able to lead them is present. If they do it, their prayer suffices them, their situation being identical, and no report from the Prophet forbids their imamate" (al-Tabsira, 1/328). Ibn Rushd wrote: "They differed concerning the imamate of a woman: the majority hold that she may not lead men; they differed on her leading women, which al-Shafi'i allows and Malik forbids; Abu Thawr and al-Tabari hold an exceptional view, allowing it without restriction. The majority only agree on forbidding her to lead men, for if it were permitted it would have been transmitted from the early generations; and since the sunna for women in prayer is to stand behind the men, it appears that they may not step ahead of them, by the Prophet's statement: 'Keep them back where Allah has kept them back.' Hence some allow her imamate for women of equal standing, which was also transmitted from some of the early generations."
The imamate is also valid of the one who prays on gravel or carries on his body or clothes an excused impurity: being led by him is valid by consensus, since when impurities are excused for their possessor they are excused for others. This is also the famous Maliki position on the imamate of the one suffering from urinary incontinence, seminal incontinence or other excused conditions. The Hanafis, Hanbalis and a weak view among the Shafi'is require, however, that an imam leading healthy people be free of all such excuses: excused people pray with real impurity and their excuse does not extend to others for lack of necessity; moreover, the imam guarantees the follower's prayer, and a thing does not guarantee what is above it. The imamate of an excused person for his like is permitted by consensus of the jurists unconditionally, provided their excuse is the same (al-Majmu, 5/348-349; Hashiyat al-Tahawi, 157; Fath al-Qadir, 1/318; al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, 1/84; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/330; Mughni al-muhtaj, 1/241; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/476).
The imam must be able to recite and memorize the minimum required for the validity of the prayer. For a reciter, the imamate is therefore not valid of the illiterate, that is, the one who does not master the Fatiha or alters a letter of it even if he masters the rest (definition by Ibn Qudama); of the one who merges a letter into another outside the prescribed place of merging (al-aratt); of the one who substitutes one letter for another, such as r for gh or s for th (al-althagh, definition by al-Nawawi); nor of the mute.
Al-Nawawi wrote: "This illiterate, this merger and this substituter: if he is able to learn, his prayer in itself is invalid and he cannot be followed, without disagreement; if he cannot, because his tongue does not obey him, or because the time is too short and he could not learn before, his prayer is valid for himself; whoever is in the same state may be led by him by consensus, since he is his like. If a reciter who does not know the whole Fatiha, or who knows less of it than he, is led by him, 2 explicit views exist, and a third excluded: the sounder, which is the recent view, is that being led by him is invalid; the earlier view is that it is invalid in the loud prayer and valid in the silent prayer; the third, excluded, holds it valid unconditionally. The compilers agree that the correct position is the invalidity of being led by him, which is the doctrine of Malik, Abu Hanifa, Ahmad and others."
Consequently, if a reciter prays behind an illiterate, the follower's prayer is invalid and the imam's valid, and likewise that of the illiterate followers: such is the doctrine of the school and of Ahmad. Abu Hanifa and Malik hold, however, that the prayers of both imam and follower, reciter and illiterate alike, are invalid, because the latter could have prayed behind a reciter: his prayer is invalid for neglecting a recitation he was able to perform. The Shafi'i school argues that one whose following is not permitted followed him: the imam's prayer is therefore not annulled by the follower's being led by him, like a woman praying among men (al-Majmu, 5/354-356; al-Hawi al-kabir, 2/325; al-Inaya, 1/375; Maraqi al-Falah, 757; al-Dasuqi, 1/328; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/26; al-Taj wal-Iklil, 2/98; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/480; al-Mughni, 2/412; al-Ifsah, 1/210; al-Insaf, 2/268).
It is disliked to be led by the fa-repeater (the one who repeats the letter fa) and the ta-repeater (the one who repeats the letter ta), as well as by the one whose pronunciation error does not change the meaning, according to the Shafi'is and Hanbalis. The Hanafis hold that the fa-repetition, the ta-repetition and the lisping defect (the tongue moving from s to th or from r to gh, and the like) bar the imamate (al-Majmu, 5/357; Nihayat al-muhtaj, 2/166; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/483; al-Mughni, 2/413; Maraqi al-Falah, 157; Ibn Abidin, 1/550; Nur al-Idah, 1/50).
Among the Malikis there are 6 views on the matter. In al-Sharh al-saghir: the prayer is valid despite an error in recitation, even in the Fatiha, if it is not deliberate; the follower is sinful if someone else able to recite well is present, otherwise not; the prayer is valid behind the one who does not distinguish dad from za while pronouncing both emphatic letters, as in the dialect of some Arabs who turned dad into za (the k having entered their language); likewise behind the one who turns the soft h into the heavily aspirated h, or r into l, or dad into d, as among some non-Arabs; but if the error or the substitution of letters is deliberate, he may not be followed.
In Bulghat al-salik (1/288), the first of the 6 views holds the prayer valid whether the meaning changed or not; the second invalidates it for any error without restriction; the third for an error in the Fatiha; the fourth when the meaning changes; the fifth, reported from Ibn Rushd, deems it disliked; the sixth holds it valid. Qadi Abd al-Wahhab al-Maliki writes for his part that the illiterate cannot be imam for a reciter, contrary to one of al-Shafi'i's 2 views. The question has 2 aspects: the first is that no prayer is formed for the reciter behind him; the second is that no prayer is formed for the illiterate either when a reciter able to lead exists.
The proof of the first aspect is the Prophet's statement: "The imam is a guarantor", which requires that he act as deputy of the follower in the recitation, something impossible for the illiterate; and the statement: "Let the one among them who recites the Book of Allah best lead you", which negates the imamate of the illiterate. Otherwise one of 2 forbidden results would follow: either the recitation is dropped from the follower, who could then validly pray without recitation, neither from himself nor from the imam; or it is imposed on him, which means that being led has no effect on the dropping of the recitation, contrary to the purport of imamate. As for the second aspect, the illiterate who knows a reciter is behind him could perform his prayer with recitation by being led by him, who would bear its charge; if he abandons that recourse, he is like the reciter praying without recitation, and that is not permitted (al-Ishraf, 1/370-372, no. 287).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked whether the prayer of one who makes an error in the Fatiha is valid. He replied: "An error in the Fatiha that does not change the meaning does not invalidate the prayer, whether one is an imam or praying alone, as in 'rabbi l-'alamin' and 'wa d-dallin'. As for readings such as 'al-hamdu li-Llahi rabba, rabbi, rabbu', 'al-hamdu li-Llahi wa l-hamdi li-Llah' with the d pronounced with damma or kasra, and 'alayhim' in its variants, these do not count as errors. As for the error that changes the meaning, if its author knows its meaning, as the one who recites 'sirata lladhina an'amta alayhim' knowing it is a first-person pronoun, his prayer is not valid, even if he does not know that it changes the meaning; if he believes it is a second-person pronoun, the matter is disputed, and Allah knows best" (al-Fatawa al-kubra, 2/185).
He was also asked about a man who is the imam of a town but not among the people of probity, while another man in the town dislikes praying behind him: is his prayer behind him valid? And if he does not pray behind him and abandons the congregational prayer, is he sinful? The one who dislikes praying behind him believes he does not pronounce the Fatiha correctly, although the town has people who recite better and are more versed. He replied: "Praise be to Allah. His not pronouncing the Fatiha correctly is highly improbable: most people, scholars and commoners alike, recite the Fatiha in a manner sufficient for the prayer. The hidden error and the one that does not change the meaning do not invalidate the prayer, and the Fatiha has many readings that were actually transmitted.
Whoever reads 'alayhim', 'alayhima' or 'alayhimu', or 'as-sirat', 'as-sirat' or 'az-zirat', does so according to famous readings; whoever reads 'al-hamdu li-Llah' or 'al-hamdu lu-Llah', or 'rabbu l-'alamin' or 'rabbi l-'alamin' with kasra, prays according to transmitted readings behind which the prayer is valid; reading 'rabbu l-'alamin' with damma or 'maliki yawmi d-din' with fatha is an error that does not change the meaning and does not invalidate the prayer. If he is a fixed imam and the town has someone more versed in recitation, one prays behind him, for the Prophet said: 'Let no man lead another man in his domain of authority.' And if he openly displays sin while no one else can hold the congregation together, one prays behind him as well and does not abandon the congregational prayer; whoever abandons it is sinful, contrary to the Book, the Sunna and the practice of the early generations" (al-Fatawa al-kubra, 2/316).
The imam must be able to perform the pillars of the prayer when he leads people in good health. The jurists differ concerning the imam who would pray by gesturing for bowing or prostration: is his prayer valid for them? The Shafi'is and Zufar among the Hanafis hold that the imamate of one who prays by gestures over a person able to bow and prostrate is permitted: the gesture takes the place of bowing and prostration, as tayammum takes the place of wudu and ghusl; just as the one who has performed wudu may pray behind the one who performed tayammum.
The majority of jurists, namely the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis, hold that being led by the one who prays by gestures is not valid: the follower's state is stronger, and bowing and prostration are pillars of the prayer, so the able cannot be led by the unable. The Prophet said:
The imam has only been appointed to be followed: when he bows, bow; and when he prostrates, prostrate.Reported by al-Bukhari (378) and Muslim (409)
The hadith thus makes bowing and prostration a quality of the imam, absent in the one who prays by gestures: pointing to a thing is not performing it. The same applies to being led by one who has neither bowing nor prostration, like the crucified. Moreover, the gesture is not a substitute for bowing and prostration, since it is part of them, and a part of a thing is not its substitute; otherwise the follower would be led in part of the prayer and not in the other, which is impossible (al-Ishraf, 1/364, no. 276; Fath al-Qadir, 1/220, 224; Ibn Abidin, 1/396; al-Jawhara al-nayyira, 1/62; al-Dasuqi, 1/328; al-Istidhkar, 2/172; Mughni al-muhtaj, 1/240; al-Majmu, 5/353; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/476; al-Mughni, 2/435).
The jurists differ, in 3 views, when the follower is healthy and prays behind a sick imam who prays seated.
First view: the follower prays seated behind an imam seated for an excuse, and standing is not permitted for him, by the Prophet's statement:
The imam has only been appointed to be followed: do not differ with him; if he prays seated, then pray seated, all of you.Reported by al-Bukhari (656) and Muslim (412)
Among its proponents is Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who recalls that 4 companions did so after the Prophet: Usayd ibn Hudayr, Qays ibn Fahd, Jabir ibn Abdallah and Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with them). The imam being seated, the followers must follow him, as in the tashahhud; if they pray standing behind him, 2 views exist on the validity of their prayer: one declares it invalid, the other valid. Among the Hanbalis, the seated man only leads one able to stand when 2 conditions are met. The first: that he be the fixed imam of the community, otherwise a pillar of the prayer would be dropped without need; the Prophet was the fixed imam when he acted thus, and it was recommended for him to appoint a deputy, people differing on the validity of his imamate and the standing prayer being more complete. The second: that his illness be one whose cure is hoped for, for making one whose ability to stand is no longer hoped for a fixed imam would result in their remaining seated permanently, which is not needed; the origin in this matter is the Prophet's act, whose recovery was hoped for (al-Mughni, 2/431, 434; Kashshaf al-Qina, 1/476; Majmu al-Fatawa, 23/406; al-Istidhkar, 2/176; Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/214).
Second view: the seated man does not lead the standing one, and the prayer behind him is not valid unconditionally: this is the view of Malik, Abd al-Malik, Mutarrif and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, based on the report of Jabir al-Ju'fi from al-Sha'bi from the Prophet: "None shall lead the prayer seated after me" (reported by Malik in the Muwatta in the narration of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, 158, and by al-Daraqutni, 1/398; al-Daraqutni notes that only Jabir al-Ju'fi reports it from al-Sha'bi, that he is abandoned and the hadith is mursal: it establishes no ruling; al-Bayhaqi also reports it, 3/80, and al-Shafi'i, al-Nawawi, al-Bayhaqi and others weakened it). Added to this is the Prophet's statement: "The imam has only been appointed to be followed: do not differ with him", understood in its general scope in both belief and deed. The imam is incapable of a pillar of the prayer, and the able cannot be led by the unable, whose archetype is the one unable to recite; likewise one unable to stand cannot lead the standing, whose archetype is the one praying by gestures although able to stand (al-Istidhkar, 2/173; Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/114; al-Majmu, 5/351; Majmu al-Fatawa, 23/406; al-Mughni, 2/431; Fath al-Bari, 2/175; al-Ishraf, 1/362-363, no. 278).
Third view: the standing one may pray behind the incapable seated imam, but praying behind him seated is not valid: they pray behind him standing, since he is able to stand and may not abandon it, like the one praying alone; the imam's incapacity does not excuse the follower from that pillar, the merit of congregational prayer not vanishing with the diminution of the pillar. This is the view of Abu Hanifa, the Shafi'is and some Malikis, based on the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her):
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), during the illness from which he died, ordered that Abu Bakr be told to lead the people in prayer. She said: "Abu Bakr was ordered to lead the people in prayer. When he entered the prayer, the Messenger of Allah felt some relief: he rose, supported by 2 men, his feet dragging along the ground. When he entered the mosque, Abu Bakr heard his shuffling and moved back, but the Messenger of Allah gestured to him: 'Stay where you are.' The Messenger of Allah came and sat at Abu Bakr's left, and he led the people seated while Abu Bakr remained standing: Abu Bakr followed the Prophet's prayer, and the people followed Abu Bakr's prayer."Reported by al-Bukhari (633, 651, 681) and Muslim (148), in one of Muslim's narrations
This narration shows explicitly that the Prophet was the imam and Abu Bakr followed him: he sat at his left, and Aisha said "he leads the people" and "Abu Bakr followed him". In another narration of Muslim: "The Prophet led the people and Abu Bakr made them hear the takbir" (reported by Muslim, 418). Al-Nawawi explains that Abu Bakr raised his voice at the takbir when the Prophet pronounced his, the latter's voice being weakened by the illness. In the narrations of al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Prophet sat beside Abu Bakr, who remained standing following the Prophet's prayer, the people following Abu Bakr's prayer; the reports, many, all point this way. Al-Shafi'i and his companions see in them the abrogation of the earlier hadith "if he prays seated, then pray seated, all of you", which concerned an earlier illness, at the time when he had withdrawn to his wives (al-Majmu, 5/351-352): this hadith is the later of the 2 commands of the Messenger of Allah, and standing is a pillar he was able to perform, which he could not therefore abandon like the other pillars (al-Mughni, 2/431).
Ibn Qudama replies that Ahmad said of the hadith cited by the Shafi'is that it establishes no ruling, Abu Bakr having begun the prayer: if he begins standing, they pray standing. Ahmad thus points to the possibility of reconciling the 2 hadiths: the first concerns the one who begins the prayer seated, the second the one who begins standing, then falls ill and sits; once reconciliation is possible it is required, without abrogation. Ibn al-Mundhir reports in some accounts that the Prophet led the people, and in others that Abu Bakr was the imam. Aisha said: "The Prophet prayed behind Abu Bakr, seated, during the illness from which he died" (authentic hadith: reported by al-Tirmidhi, 362, and Ibn Majah, 1232), and Anas: "The Prophet prayed, during his illness, behind Abu Bakr, seated, wrapped in a garment" (reported by al-Tirmidhi, 363, whose chain al-Albani declared authentic). Al-Tirmidhi declared both hadiths hasan sahih, and noted that no prayer of the Prophet behind Abu Bakr is known outside these reports (al-Mughni, 2/432). As for the imamate of one incapable of performing the pillars over his like, it is permitted by consensus of the jurists (same references).
One condition remains: the imam must be free from losing any condition of the prayer's validity, such as purity from minor or major impurity. The imamate of one in a state of minor or major impurity, or of one carrying impurity, is not valid by consensus if he knows it: he violates a condition of the prayer while being able to fulfill it, with no difference between minor and major impurity, nor between impurity of clothes, body or place. The scholars detail, however, the case of the imam who prays in a state of impurity, whether aware of his state or not: is the prayer of the followers behind him valid? Is there a difference between their learning of his state during or after the prayer? And if the imam's prayer is annulled by a prior impediment, is the prayer of the followers annulled or valid, the imam then appointing a substitute? Four cases arise.
First case: the imam prays in minor or major impurity knowing his state, or the follower knows it. The jurists agree that if the imam prays in major or minor impurity knowing it, and the followers learn of it during or after the prayer, their prayer is annulled and they must repeat it. Al-Nawawi wrote: "If he prays behind someone in major impurity, from urine or otherwise, and knows the imam's state, he is sinful thereby and his prayer is invalid by consensus" (al-Majmu, 4/256, 258). The jurists then differ on the case where the imam knows his state but the followers do not: must they repeat the prayer? The majority of jurists, namely the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis within the school, require the repetition of the whole prayer, imam and followers. Malik said: "If he leads them while remembering his major impurity, the prayer of all of them is invalid; likewise if he remembers during the prayer and leads them on, unknowingly or out of shyness: he has ruined it for them." Ibn al-Qasim added: "Any imam overtaken by what annuls his prayer who leads them on has his prayer annulled: they must repeat as soon as they learn of it" (al-Jami li-masa'il al-Mudawwana, 1/256; al-Taj wal-Iklil, 2/417; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/23; Tahbir al-Mukhtasar, 1/415; al-Mughni, 2/293-294; al-Kafi, 1/182; al-Insaf, 2/267-268).
The Shafi'is hold that repeating is not required of them. Al-Nawawi wrote: "If he was ignorant of the imam's state, outside the Friday prayer, his prayer is formed; if he learns during the prayer of the imam's state, he must leave him and complete his prayer alone, building on what he prayed with him; if he remains in imitation for a moment or has no intention of leaving, his prayer is invalid by consensus, since he prayed part of his prayer behind an impure man knowing his state." Those who explicitly declared this invalidity in the absence of the intention to leave and of imitation of his acts include Shaykh Abu Hamid, Qadi Abu al-Tayyib in their annotations, al-Mahamili and several leading companions of the school. If he learns nothing until the salam, his prayer suffices him, whether the imam knew his own state or not, the follower's negligence being excluded in both cases: such is the madhhab, by which the majority settled.
Al-Shafi'i wrote, before the book of funerals in al-Buwayti, in lines: if the imam knows his state, the prayer of the followers is not valid; if he is forgetful, it is valid. The author of al-Talkhis concluded from it that if the imam does so deliberately, repetition is required, this being 2 explicit statements of al-Shafi'i in his view. Al-Qaffal replies in Sharh al-Talkhis that his companions judged that he had erred: the well-known position of al-Shafi'i is the absence of repetition even if deliberate, al-Shafi'i having only reported Malik's view; in another copy of Sharh al-Talkhis, most of the companions say there is no repetition even if deliberate, and some see 2 views in it; Shaykh Abu Ali al-Sindji reports that the companions rejected the author of al-Talkhis: the well-known position of al-Shafi'i is the absence of repetition even if deliberate.
The compiler affirms the existence of the 2 views, the text on the obligation of repetition having been seen in an authenticated copy of al-Buwayti and reported by the author of al-Talkhis, a trustworthy imam: it must therefore be accepted. Shaykh Abu Ali explains it by the fact that the imam who deliberately prays in impurity is trifling with the prayer, his acts not really being a prayer, even in his own belief: the prayer behind him is therefore not valid, like that of the unbeliever and of whoever does not regard his prayer as a prayer. To the objection that impurity may remain hidden, it is answered that the imam's deliberate prayer in impurity is rare, and the rare case does not remove the repetition; in every case, the correct and well-known view of the madhhab is the absence of repetition if the imam did it deliberately (al-Majmu, 4/256, 258).