“Thus, whoever performs a fard (obligatory) prayer while seated because standing is genuinely difficult for him, his prayer is valid and he is on the same footing as the one who prays standing. Should this excused person force himself to stand, despite the hardship, that is better, for the extra effort brings greater reward. It is therefore quite possible that his reward for enduring the hardship equals the reward of the prayer itself, and hence the sitting person’s reward can still be described as half that of the one who stands. By contrast, a person who offers a nafl (supererogatory) prayer sitting while able to stand has a valid prayer, yet his recompense is unquestionably half that of the one who performs it standing. As for al-Baji’s claim that the hadith covers both obligatory and voluntary prayers: if by ‘obligatory’ he means the specific situation just outlined, well and good; otherwise the majority of scholars have rejected that view and have restricted the hadith to voluntary prayer alone.” He continued: “This, however, does not rule out the scenario proposed by al-Khattabi, for another report substantiates it. Ahmad relates—through the chain of Ibn Jurayj, from Ibn Shihab, from Anas—that when the Prophet ﷺ arrived in Madinah it was afflicted with fever, so the people fell ill. The Prophet entered the mosque and found them praying while seated and said: ‘The prayer offered sitting is half the prayer of the one who stands.’ All the narrators in this chain are reliable, and al-Nasa’i provides a corroborating isnad from a different route. The report clearly concerns an excuse, and therefore applies to the person who forces himself to stand despite hardship, exactly as al-Khattabi explained.” I add: The report cited from Ahmad appears in his Musnad (3/136): “Muhammad b. Bakr narrated to us; Ibn Jurayj narrated to us; Ibn Shihab said: Anas informed me …,” and at the end it adds: “… so the people strained themselves to pray standing.” Its chain is composed of trustworthy narrators—as al-Hafiz affirmed—and they are all found in the Six Books. Nevertheless, Ibn Jurayj was a mudallis, and here he transmits it in the mu‘allaq form (“Ibn Shihab said”). The other corroborating chain will be mentioned next.