is offered two rakʿahs at a time. Then, if you fear the approach of dawn, pray one rakʿah as witr.” The jurists among the scholars of hadith prefer separating them, because of the authenticity and abundance of the reports supporting this, although they also permit joining them.

The point here is that they mention no difference between the two forms of witr except that one is uninterrupted and the other separated. This is precisely the distinction between continuity and separation. Thus, deliberately giving the salām invalidates an obligatory prayer, or any similar prayer prescribed to be uninterrupted, only because it separates one part of the prayer from another. If someone does this inadvertently, however, his prayer is not invalidated.

Anything incompatible with prayer—whether an action or extensive movement, deliberate speech, or failure to fulfil one of its conditions, such as facing the direction of prayer, covering the parts of the body that must be covered, or the like—also separates its parts, besides being incompatible with it. Such an act can bring a person out of prayer, just as the salām does. Hence some scholars of Iraq held that a person leaves prayer through anything incompatible with it, just as he leaves it through the salām. However, the jurists among the scholars of hadith and the scholars of the Hijaz disallowed this, because the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“The key to prayer is purification; its prohibitions begin with the opening declaration of Allah’s greatness and are lifted by the salām.”

There are also other grounds establishing that one may enter prayer only in the prescribed manner and leave it only in the prescribed manner.

Several points further clarify this discussion:

First: Those who permit witr to be offered as three rakʿahs with a separation—such as al-Shāfiʿī and Ahmad