into the row, and no one objected to me.” In their view this narration carries the force of a fully connected report, though that judgment is open to examination.
The majority nevertheless agree that passing in front of someone who is praying is reprehensible, because of the stern warnings reported on the matter and the Prophet’s—peace and blessings be upon him—wording: “Let him repel the passer-by, for he is but a devil.”
Third Issue. The scholars disagreed about blowing (nafkh) during the prayer, holding three opinions: (1) a group regarded it as disliked yet did not require the prayer to be repeated; (2) another required the worshiper who blew to repeat the prayer; and (3) a third group distinguished between an audible blow and one that is inaudible.
The root of their disagreement is whether blowing should be considered speech or not.
Fourth Issue. They unanimously agree that laughter nullifies the prayer, but they differed over mere smiling. The cause of their disagreement is whether smiling should be assimilated to laughter or not.
Fifth Issue. The jurists differed concerning the prayer of one who is suppressing the urge to relieve himself (al-ḥāqin). Most scholars consider it reprehensible for a man to pray in that condition, citing the ḥadīth of Zayd ibn Arqam: “I heard the Messenger of God—peace and blessings be upon him—say, ‘If any of you needs to relieve himself, let him begin with that before the prayer.’” They also invoke the report from ʿĀʾishah—may God be pleased with her—that the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—said, “None of you should pray in the presence of food, nor while resisting the call of the two unclean matters,” meaning defecation and urination, as well as similar prohibitions related from ʿUmar.
Some scholars go further, declaring such a prayer invalid and requiring it to be repeated. Ibn al-Qāsim relates from Mālik a report indicating the same invalidity, for it is transmitted that “he instructed the man to repeat the prayer both within its time and after its time.”
The reason for their disagreement lies in the legal effect of a prohibition: does it render the prohibited act void, or does it merely entail sin while leaving the act—if originally obligatory or permissible—technically valid? Those who deem the prayer invalid cite a ḥadīth transmitted by Syrian authorities, some attributing it to Thawbān, others to Abū Hurayrah, in which the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—said, “It is not lawful for a believer to pray while he is greatly suppressing urine.” Abū ʿUmar Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr commented, “This ḥadīth has a weak chain of transmission and furnishes no proof.”