and let the women clap.” (1) Thus, if he stands for a fifth rak'ah, for example, and two trustworthy persons say “Subḥān Allah” to alert him, he must return, unless he is certain that he himself is correct. If he does not return while not certain that he is correct, his prayer is invalid, because he has deliberately abandoned an obligatory act. But if he is certain that he is correct, he should not return.

It is understood from the author’s words that, when two trustworthy persons say “Subḥān Allah” to alert him, there are five possible cases:

First: he is certain that he himself is correct, so he follows his own judgment and does not return on the basis of what they say.

Second: he is certain that they are correct.

Third: he thinks it more likely that they are correct.

Fourth: he thinks it more likely that they are mistaken.

Fifth: the two possibilities are equally balanced in his mind.

In these four cases, according to the author’s wording, he follows what they say. The correct view, however, is that he does not follow what they say if he believes them likely to be mistaken.

Question: If two trustworthy persons alert him without saying “Subḥān Allah,” is this given the same ruling as saying “Subḥān Allah”? That is, if they clear their throats to alert him, for example?

The answer is: yes. If they alert him by means other than saying “Subḥān Allah,” it is as though they had alerted him by saying “Subḥān Allah.” Thus, the author’s restriction of this matter to saying “Subḥān Allah” is either by way of giving an example (2), or because this is what usually occurs, or in consideration of the wording of the hadith. Some jurists have phrased it: “If two trustworthy persons alert him”; and this wording is broader than the author’s wording.