recommended.’ This is also the position of the Shāfiʿīs and a number of our Ḥanafī jurists.

Al-Ḥāfiẓ said:

“The majority adduce as proof a ḥadīth recorded by Muslim and others: the Prophet ﷺ heard a muʾadhdhin; when the caller pronounced the takbīr he said, ‘upon the natural disposition,’ and when the caller recited the tashahhud he said, ‘delivered from the Fire.’ Since the Prophet ﷺ uttered something other than what the muʾadhdhin said, we know that the command to repeat the call is for recommendation, not obligation. This has been contested on the grounds that the ḥadīth does not state that he failed to repeat the caller’s words; it is quite possible that he did so and the narrator omitted it because it was customary, mentioning only the additional remarks. It may also be that the incident occurred before the command was issued, or that the person who issued the command never intended to include himself among those addressed.”

I say: Among the evidence for the majority is what Mālik relates in al-Muwaṭṭaʾ: whenever the muʾadhdhin began the adhān on Friday, the Companions would begin talking among themselves. It is highly improbable that responding could be obligatory while the Companions would nevertheless turn away from it to engage in conversation—consult al-Muwaṭṭaʾ.

The same point is supported by what Ibn Saʿd narrates from Mūsā ibn Ṭalḥah ibn ʿUbayd Allah, who said: “I saw ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān while the muʾadhdhin was calling the adhān, and he was speaking to the people, asking them about prices and current news.” Its chain is sound according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhārī and Muslim).