Reconciliation here is entirely possible. Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, alluded to it when he said: “The Companions remained standing only because Abu Bakr had begun the prayer with them while standing.” Accordingly, we say: if the regular imam develops an illness during the prayer that leaves him unable to stand, and he completes his prayer seated, then the followers complete it standing. There is no doubt that this is a sound and clear reconciliation.

Accordingly, if the imam leads the followers seated from the beginning of the prayer, they should pray seated; but if he begins leading them standing and then an illness befalls him, so that he sits, they should pray standing. In this way, the two proofs are reconciled, and reconciling the two proofs gives effect to them both.

We said that the author stipulated two conditions for followers who are able to stand to pray behind an imam who is unable to do so.

The first condition is that he be the regular imam.

The second condition is that his illness be expected to pass.

It is well known that the fundamental legal principle is that whatever the Lawgiver has stated in unrestricted terms may not be subjected to any restriction without evidence, for we have no right to restrict what the Sacred Law has left unrestricted. This principle is very beneficial in many issues, among them wiping over the khuffs. The Lawgiver permitted wiping over the khuffs without restriction, and did not stipulate that the khuff must be of a particular type, or that it be free of defects which they have mentioned as preventing wiping, such as a tear and the like (1). Thus, it is obligatory for us to leave unrestricted what the Sacred Law has left unrestricted, because we are not