Author
A seminary student specializing in advanced jurisprudence (Dars-e Kharej) at the Institute of Higher Islamic Jurisprudence and Islamic Sciences in Qom and Phd student at research institute of hawzah and university (Rihu)
Abstract
One of the significant and disputed issues in Imamiyyah jurisprudence is the obligation of performing Sujood al-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness) during prayer. This matter has been a subject of serious scholarly debate from the time of early jurists to the present day. Despite its practical importance, a comprehensive and independent study addressing all aspects of this topic has yet to be conducted. Given the breadth of the discussion, the present research focuses specifically on one of its branches: the legal ruling on Sujood al-Sahw in cases of unintentional additions or omissions during prayer.
The central question of this study is: What is the ruling on Sujood al-Sahw for every unintentional addition or omission? Jurists’ views on this issue vary widely and are at times contradictory. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical method and addressing recent objections and inconsistencies in the evidences, demonstrates that not every unintentional addition or omission necessitates Sujood al-Sahw. Among the narrations supporting obligation, only the narration of Sufyan ibn al-Simt and the mursal report of Ibn Junayd have complete legal implication, yet both suffer from issues of authenticity. On the other hand, the evidence supporting the non-obligation is both valid and sound. Additionally, the classical juristic consensus (ijma’) and common practice oppose the obligation. There is also no reliable evidence for recommending Sujood al-Sahw in such cases, and invoking obligatory precaution (ihtiyat wajib) is not warranted, since neither reliable textual evidence nor juristic consensus exists to establish such a ruling
Keywords
Main Subjects
)