it is performed with a single adhān and a single iqāma, and they base their position on the second narration from Ibn ʿUmar. Al-Ṭaḥāwī states all of this explicitly in his commentary and strengthens his choice by analogy with the combining of ẓuhr and ʿaṣr at ʿArafah. He then said:

“Of all that has reached us on this matter, the report we have from Jābir is the one we prefer, for sound reasoning supports it.”

Al-Nawawī remarks in his commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim:

“This is the sound view in our school: it is recommended to give the adhān for the earlier of the two prayers and an iqāma for each of them, so that the two prayers are performed with one adhān and two iqāmas. The report that mentions ‘a single iqāma’ is interpreted to mean that every prayer must have its own iqāma. Such a reconciliation is indispensable in order to harmonise it with the first narration (from Ibn ʿUmar) as well as with the narration of Jābir.”

I say: It is strange that our scholars accepted Jābir’s ḥadīth regarding the combining at ʿArafah—one adhān and two iqāmas—yet set it aside for the combining at Muzdalifah, where the very same arrangement applies. This is one of the curiosities of legal reasoning. Small wonder, then, that Imām al-Ṭaḥāwī dissented, followed by Shaykh Ibn al-Humām and later Abū al-Ḥasanāt al-Laknawī in his Taʿlīq al-Mumajjad; they were indeed correct.

12 – Likewise, for each of the missed prayers that are being lawfully made up, he gives a single iqāma, as the Messenger of Allah ﷺ did during the Battle of the Trench.

There is also, on this point, the report of Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī (may Allah be pleased with him):

“We were detained on the Day of the Trench until a portion of the night had passed, and then Allah spared us. Concerning this Allah the Exalted says: ‘And Allah repelled the believers’ enemies; Allah is ever All-Powerful, All-Mighty.’ (Al-Aḥzāb 25)”