is inadmissible. The hadith is further supported by numerous corroborating reports from Ibn ‘Umar, Abu Sa‘id, Abu Hurayra, Ibn ‘Abbas, and Anas. Al-Zayla‘i has gathered them in Nasb al-Raya (2/10–12) and [Hafiz Ibn Hajar in] al-Diraya (p. 93). Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya likewise graded the hadith reliable, as cited in al-Furu‘ of Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi (fol. 48/2) (1); al-Busiri declared some of its chains sahih. I have discussed the report in detail and traced all its lines of transmission in Irwa al-Ghalil (no. 500). [Benefit] The plain sense of the hadith is that the imam’s recitation suffices and substitutes for the follower’s, so the latter is not obliged to recite. Shaykh ‘Ali al-Qari explains in Sharh Musnad Abi Hanifa (p. 150): “That is, the follower is not required to recite, nor is he permitted to recite behind the imam; the wording is unrestricted, applying to both silent and audible prayers.” To infer from the hadith that reciting behind the imam is unlawful is clearly far-fetched. Shaykh Ibn al-Humam justifies such an interpretation by saying (p. 239): “Recitation is legally ascribed to the follower because the imam’s recitation counts for him; if he were to recite as well, he would have two recitations in one prayer, and that is not prescribed.” Abu al-Hasanat answers (p. 148): “The imam’s recitation is not actually the follower’s recitation, neither linguistically nor legally; it is his only by legal attribution. Thus, if the follower were to recite, the result would merely be that he has two recitations: one real and the other …” (1) I subsequently located the same statement in Majmu‘ al-Fatawa (23/271–272); this is how it appears in the author’s personal copy of al-Sifah.