Chapter: The permissibility of a person offering a supererogatory prayer leading those performing an obligatory prayer ⦗1⦘

Jābir ibn ʿAbd-Allāh (may Allah be pleased with them both) reported that Muʿādh ibn Jabal used to pray the last night prayer (ʿIshāʾ) with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, then return to his people and lead them in that same prayer.

Overall meaning:
The dwellings of Banū Salama—the clan of the Anṣār to which Muʿādh belonged—were located outside Madinah. Muʿādh, may Allah be pleased with him, was keenly devoted to good works; he made sure to attend the prayer with the Prophet ﷺ, and after completing the obligatory prayer behind him he would go out to his people and lead them in that prayer. For Muʿādh it counted as a voluntary act, while for his people it was their obligatory prayer, and all of this occurred with the Prophet’s knowledge and tacit approval.

Scholarly disagreement:
The jurists have differed over the validity of an imam who is praying voluntarily leading congregants who are performing an obligatory prayer.

Al-Zuhri, Mālik, the Ḥanafīs, and—according to the well-known report—Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, a position adopted by most of his students, held that such leadership is invalid. They cite the Prophet’s statement: “The imam has only been appointed to be followed, so do not differ with him” (agreed upon), arguing that the difference in intention between imam and followers constitutes the forbidden divergence.

In contrast, ʿAṭāʾ, al-Awzāʿī, al-Shāfiʿī, Abū Thawr, and—according to a strong narration—Aḥmad, as well as Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah, held that it is valid. Their proof is the very ḥadīth of Muʿādh: he would perform the obligatory prayer behind the Prophet ﷺ in his mosque, then go to his people and lead them in it.

It is obvious that one of the two prayers he offered had to be supererogatory, and for several reasons it can only have been the second:
• His legal responsibility was already discharged by the first prayer he performed with the Prophet ﷺ.
• It is inconceivable that he would regard his prayer with the Prophet in the Prophet’s mosque as optional while treating the one with his own people in their local mosque as obligatory.

Ibn Ḥazm gave an extensive defense of this view, systematically refuting the arguments of the first group with unsurpassed thoroughness.