see the case of someone reciting privately on Friday? It may be said that it is not recommended for him to prostrate apart from the congregation, just as someone praying behind an imam is not prescribed to prostrate for his own forgetfulness, because following the imam takes precedence over prostration. Even if he is far away and we hold that it is recommended for him to recite, his case is comparable to that of someone for whom reciting behind his imam is recommended. Were he to recite a verse of prostration, he would not prostrate independently of the imam. I know of no disagreement concerning this.

Here, maintaining conformity with the imam in outward actions is better than prostrating for recitation or forgetfulness; indeed, he is forbidden to do so independently. On Friday, the people prostrated only because Umar prostrated. Had he not prostrated, they would not have prostrated then. Thus, if Umar’s report may mean that prostration was not made obligatory upon us in this situation, it no longer constitutes evidence, even if it were traced back to the Prophet.

Moreover, prostration upon reciting the Quran is one of Islam’s manifest rites. When the Quran is recited in the congregational mosque, all the people prostrate to Allah, Lord of all worlds. Omitting this detracts from that rite. For this reason, we consider the stronger view to be that the Eid prayer is an individual obligation, as held by Abū Hanīfah and others. This is also one of al-Shāfiʿī’s views and one of the two positions in Ahmad’s school.

The view that it is not obligatory is exceedingly implausible, for it is among Islam’s greatest rites. People assemble for it in greater numbers than for the Friday prayer, and proclaiming Allah’s greatness is prescribed during it. The view that it is a collective obligation lacks a clear criterion, for if it were attended in