In his statement, “and that the excuse continue until the beginning of the time for the second prayer,” he did not mention continuity between the two prayers, which indicates that such continuity is not a condition. For continuity is not a condition for combining by delay. Thus, if someone combines by delay, and the time for the second prayer begins and he prays the first prayer, then remains for an hour or two before praying the second, his combination is valid. This is because continuity is a condition for combining in advance, but not for combining by delay.

Some scholars held that continuity is a condition for combining by delay, just as it is for combining in advance.

Other scholars held that continuity is not a condition, neither for combining in advance nor for combining by delay.

Thus, there are three views:

The first is that continuity is not a condition, neither for combining in advance nor for combining by delay. This was the view preferred by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah.

The second is that it is a condition in both forms of combining, since combining means joining together. This is the view of some scholars.

The third is to distinguish between the two: continuity is required for combining in advance, but not for combining by delay. This is the well-known position of the madhhab.

Case: A man is travelling and intends to combine by delay. The time for the first prayer expires while he is still travelling, but he arrives in town during the time of the second prayer. He may combine the prayers, because he will pray the first prayer and then pray the second. However, he may not shorten them, because that which permits shortening—the state of travel—has come to an end.