The travelling distance

[Husain]

1) In one of your previous posts, you claimed that 18 farsakhs = 88 km, but then (possibly after I responded) you changed your post to say that 48 miles = 88 km.

I meant 16 farsakh, but wrote 18 by mistake, that is why I corrected it.

But it was in that reply (nr. 2 in the topic) that you mentioned that position as the "stronger", and that was what I was referring to when I mentioned that it would be wrong to consider this opinion as the strongest (or just stronger than the others) as you mentioned.

You quoted the 77km view, but were referring to the 88km one?
The 88km has every right to be called the stronger view, for the reasons mentioned viz. indication in hadith, fatawa of sahabah, agreement with the other madhahib and no need to continually change it.
I never said it to be stronger with regard to its narration in the madhab.

2) You say that the issue isn't one of a clear-cut fatwa position in the madhhab, but I disagree with you. It is quite clear, as mentioned by:

'Allama Badr al-Din al-'Ayni in 'Umdar al-Qari,
'Allama Ibn 'Abidin al-Shami in Radd al-Muhtar,
'Allama Jalal al-Din Khawarzi in Kifaya ma'a Fath al-Qadir,
'Allama Zayn al-Din Ibn Najim in Bahr al-Ra'iq,
'Allama Ibrahim al-Halabi in Ghunya al-Mutamalli,
'Allama Ahmad Rida Khan in Jadd al-Mumtar,

All these giants (and more) mention 18 farsakh as being the fatwa position. And you yourself mentioned it in one of your earlier replies. Now you're contradicting yourself?

3) Your argument that the distance depends on time and place, although may be valid, is nothing compared to the fatwa by the abovementioned 'ulama - who certainly would not have said that 18 farsakh is the fatwa position if it was not the case. Didn't they know that rulings change?

Did you even open up these books to see whether what they say, is what you claim, or did you rely on quotes from elsewhere?

You claim that all these giants mentioned that 18 farsakh is the fatwa position, not that it depends on time and place.
It is obvious that you didn't read what these giants had to say, but rather probably relied on the quotes from Ml. Sa'idi or someone else.

Here is what one of those giants, Allamah ibn Nujaim had to say, in his Bahr al-Ra'iq:

وَأَشَارَ الْمُصَنِّفُ إلَى أَنَّهُ لَا اعْتِبَارَ بِالْفَرَاسِخِ ، وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ ؛ لِأَنَّ الطَّرِيقَ لَوْ كَانَ وَعْرًا بِحَيْثُ يُقْطَعُ فِي ثَلَاثَةِ أَيَّامٍ أَقَلَّ مِنْ خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ فَرْسَخًا قَصَرَ بِالنَّصِّ ، وَعَلَى التَّقْدِيرِ بِهَا لَا يَقْصُرُ فَيُعَارِضُ النَّصَّ فَلَا يُعْتَبَرُ سِوَى سَيْرِ الثَّلَاثَةِ ، وَفِي النِّهَايَةِ الْفَتْوَى عَلَى اعْتِبَارِ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ فَرْسَخًا ، وَفِي الْمُجْتَبَى فَتْوَى أَكْثَرِ أَئِمَّةِ خُوَارِزْمَ عَلَى خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ فَرْسَخًا ا هـ .
وَأَنَا أَتَعَجَّبُ مِنْ فَتْوَاهُمْ فِي هَذَا وَأَمْثَالِهِ بِمَا يُخَالِفُ مَذْهَبَ الْإِمَامِ خُصُوصًا الْمُخَالِفَ لِلنَّصِّ الصَّرِيحِ

The crux of this passage is after mentioning that the correct view in the madhab is that there is no consideration for distance by farsakh, Allamah ibn Nujaim then mentions that some Ulama mentioned the fatwa to be on 18 farsakhs, while others said 21.

He then refutes them saying:
"I am shocked by them passing such fatwa in this and similar issues that oppose the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifah, especially where the fatwa contradicts clear statements."

Yet you claim that he is of the opinion that this is a clear-cut issue of where 18 farsakhs is the fatwa position!

Lets check another of your (mis)quotes:

You claim that "'Allama Ibrahim al-Halabi in Ghunya al-Mutamalli" is one of the giants who holds the view that 18 farsakh is the clear-cut fatwa position as opposed to the stronger position being that it changes according to time and place.

It is obvious that you never opened the book to confirm this, otherwise it would mean that you deliberately distorted his words, which I am sure that you would never do.

Here are his exact words:

اعلم أن اقل مدة السفر عندنا مسافة ثلاثة أيام من أقصر أيام السنة بالسير الوسط، وهو مشي الأقدام والإبل في البر واعتدال الريح في البحر، وعن أبي يوسف يومان وأكثر الثالث،
وصحح صاحب الهداية أنه لا يعتبر القدر بالفراسخ لكن قال المرغيناني: وعامة المشايخ قدروها بالفراسخ فقيل أحد وعشرون فرسخا وقيل ثمانية عشر فرسخا، قال المرغيناني وعليه الفتوى، وقال العتابي في جوامع الفقه وهو المختار، وقيل خمسة عشر فرسخا،
واختيار صاحب الهداية أولى لشموله السهل والجبل، فإنه يعتبر في الجبل ما يليق به وهو أن يسير فيه سيرا وسطا مسافة ثلثة أيام.

After mentioning that the madhab is three days, Allamah Halabi quotes the author of Hidayah as stating that the correct position is that no consideration is giving to calculating it in farsakhs.
Allamah Halabi then mentions that many mashaikh gave fatwa on certain distances and mentions them, thereafter he states:
"The choice of the author of Hidayah is preferred, as it takes into consideration travel in easy ground as well as mountainous terrain, as in mountainous terrain the amount taken into consideration is the amount suited to it and that is three days of average travel therein."

So this giant is also stating that the correct and stronger opinion is that it changes according to place and time, not that it be calculated in farsakhs.
This is the direct opposite of what you claimed him to be stating.

I don't have time to go and check the remainder of your quotes, so lets conclude with Allamah ibn Abidin, regarding whom you mention:"Imam Ibn 'Abidin alone is proof enough for me".

( قَوْلُهُ وَلَا اعْتِبَارَ بِالْفَرَاسِخِ ) الْفَرْسَخُ ثَلَاثَةُ أَمْيَالٍ وَالْمِيلُ أَرْبَعَةُ آلَافِ ذِرَاعٍ عَلَى مَا تَقَدَّمَ فِي بَابِ التَّيَمُّمِ ( قَوْلُهُ عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ ) لِأَنَّ الْمَذْكُورَ فِي ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ .
اعْتِبَارُ ثَلَاثَةِ أَيَّامٍ كَمَا فِي الْحِلْيَةِ وَقَالَ فِي الْهِدَايَةِ : هُوَ الصَّحِيحُ احْتِرَازًا عَنْ قَوْلِ عَامَّةِ الْمَشَايِخِ مِنْ تَقْدِيرِهَا بِالْفَرَاسِخِ .
ثُمَّ اخْتَلَفُوا فَقِيلَ : وَاحِدٌ وَعِشْرُونَ ، وَقِيلَ : ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ ، وَقِيلَ : خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ وَالْفَتْوَى عَلَى الثَّانِي لِأَنَّهُ الْأَوْسَطُ .
وَفِي الْمُجْتَبَى فَتْوَى أَئِمَّةِ خُوَارِزْمَ عَلَى الثَّالِثِ .
وَجْهُ الصَّحِيحِ أَنَّ الْفَرَاسِخَ تَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الطَّرِيقِ فِي السَّهْلِ وَالْجَبَلِ وَالْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ بِخِلَافِ الْمَرَاحِلِ مِعْرَاجٌ

Allamah Haskafi in ad-Durr mentioned that no regard is given to calculation of the distance though farsakhs.

Did Allamah ibn Abidin disagree with him?
No, instead he mentioned that the reason for this is that the Zahir ar-Rawayah clearly states 3 days journey.
He then quotes Sahib al-Hidayah as saying that the correct view is that the distance will not be calculated with farsakhs and then Allamah ibn Abidin mentions that classifying that as correct is to caution against the view of most mashaikh, who calculated it by distance. He then mentioned that they disagreed amongst themselves, with some saying 21, others 18 and others 15. Fatwa was given on 18 as it is the middle course, while others gave fatwa on 15.
He then says that the reason for the correct view (ie. of not calculating) is that the distance through farsakh differs based on the type of terrain and road.

It is clear that Allamah ibn Abidin is not saying that this is a clear-cut position, where the distance is 18 farsakhs, but rather like the other giants of the madhab, he is saying that the preferred view is that it isn't calculated, inspite of certain mashaikh giving Fatwa on certain distances.

And you yourself mentioned it in one of your earlier replies. Now you're contradicting yourself?

Please show me where I said that this is an issue of clear-cut fatwa, not one that can be calculated to suit each time and place?
Yes, I did say:
"So the crux is that the original madhab is 3 days journey.
The Fuqaha then calculated this, with the majority giving fatwa on 18 farsakh."

however after going through the books of fiqh, it has become clear that the majority didn't specify a distance and that this is the madhab.

3) Your argument that the distance depends on time and place, although may be valid, is nothing compared to the fatwa by the abovementioned 'ulama - who certainly would not have said that 18 farsakh is the fatwa position if it was not the case. Didn't they know that rulings change?

Further more: Imam Ibn 'Abidin did not live that long ago, and he is the foremost authority in the later Hanafi madhhab. Not that much have changed since, and the 15 farsakh position was known to all the abovementioned 'ulama.

You misquoted a few of whom you classify as giants, as holding your view.

There are 5 categories of Fuqaha who are allowed to do ijtihad, none of those you quoted are from those categories.
Let us now see what the real giants of the madhab had to say.

Let us start with
1) Shams al-Aimmah as-Sarakhsi, who is classified as a mujtahid in masail:

وَلَا مَعْنَى لِلتَّقْدِيرِ بِالْفَرَاسِخِ ، فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ يَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الطُّرُقِ فِي السُّهُولِ وَالْجِبَالِ وَالْبَحْرِ وَالْبَرِّ ، وَإِنَّمَا التَّقْدِيرُ بِالْأَيَّامِ وَالْمَرَاحِل

ِ
"Calculating it in farsakhs is MEANINGLESS, as it would differ based on the roads, whether they are on normal land, mountains, land or sea. The calculation would ONLY be by days and marahil."

Who is saying this?
Allamah Shami, who you view as the foremost authority in the later Hanafi madhhab and who you feel is enough for you, said regarding him:

أَقْوَى شُرُوْحِهِ الَّذِيْ كَالشَّمْسِ *** مَبْسُوْطُ شَمْسِ الْأُمَّة السَّرَخْسِي
مُعْتَمَدُ النُّقُوْلِ لَيْسَ يُعْمَلُ*** بِخُلْفِهِ وَ لَيْسَ عَنْهُ يُعْدَل

ُ
"The Mabsut of Shams al-Aimmah as-Sarakhsi is the strongest commentary of al-Kafi , and is like the Sun.
Its quotes are extremely reliable, that whch is contradictory to it is not practiced upon, neither is it left for anything else."

I am sure that this Giant knew what was the madhab, better than you or me.

2) Sahib al-Hidayah, who was already quoted, mentioned the correct view to be non-calculation in farsakhs.

And who is Sahib al-Hidayah?

Allamah ibn Abidin mentions:

صاحبُ الهدايةِ إِمامٌ جليلٌ مِن أعظمِ مَشايِخِ المذهبِ مِن طَبقةِ أصحابِ الترجيح والتصحيح

"Sahib al-Hidayah is a lofty Imam, from amoingst the greatest Mashaikh of the madhab, from the category of those who give preference and classify as correct."
He knew the madhab better then us, don't u think?

3- Allamah Tahawi- Allamah ibn Abidin mentioned him to be a mujtahid in Masail: He mentions in his mukhtasar 3 days, not distance.

4- Allamah Qadi Khan, who is mentioned to be Faqih an-Nafs by Allamah ibn Abidin:
He mentions in his Fatawa 3 days and says that some calculated it on farsakhs. He definitely doesn't give fatwa on farsakhs.

5- Allamah Kasani, The king of Ulama, who said in Bada'i:

وَالتَّقْدِيرُ بِالْفَرَاسِخِ غَيْرُ سَدِيدٍ ؛ لِأَنَّ ذَلِكَ يَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الطَّرِيقِ

"Calculation using farsakhs is not sound, as it (the amount travelled) changes based on changes in the type of road".

6- Mulla Khusru in Durrar
7- As-Shurunbulali in Shashiyah ad-Durar and Imdad
8- Damad Zadah, author of Majma al-Anhur, who said ( I have no time to translate it, it is clear):
وَكَلَامُهُ مُشْعِرٌ بِأَنْ لَا عِبْرَةَ بِالْفَرَاسِخِ وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ وَقَدْ اعْتَبَرَ الْأَكْثَرُونَ بِأَحَدٍ وَعِشْرِينَ فَرْسَخًا كَأَنَّهُمْ قَدَّرُوا كُلَّ يَوْمٍ بِمَرْحَلَةِ سَبْعَةِ فَرَاسِخَ وَقِيلَ خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ لِأَنَّهُ قُدِّرَ بِخَمْسَةٍ وَقِيلَ : ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ لِأَنَّهُ الْمُتَوَسِّطُ بَيْنَ الْأَكْثَرِ وَالْأَقَلِّ وَهُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ لَكِنَّ هَذَا مُخَالِفٌ لِمَذْهَبِ الْإِمَامِ وَالنَّصِّ الصَّرِيحِ .

9- Allamah ibn Kamal Basha in I'dah al-Islah

It is quite clear what was the view of the giants of the madhab, so this view can easily be called the strongest by anyone wishing to do so.

It is equally clear that the view you claim to be strongest has been refuted by the giants of the madhab.

5) The hadith you speak of, regarding the 4 barids, is weak according to Imam Badr al-Din al-'Ayni, and he states that some even called him (the weak narrator - 'Abd al-Wahhab) a liar.

It is weak without a doubt, thus it wasn't used as the basis for the istidlal, rather as a backup.

It is for this reason that I said:
" It is indicated to in the ahadith" instead of
"It is proven in the ahadith".

The main basis is the athar of the sahabah.

Regardless, the famous position of the Hanafi madhab is that we prefer weak ahadith over qiyas and opinions.

7) My point with this discussion was to gain insights as to the background of the 77 km position. We know that it was a miscalculation, but still many people follow this position.

You should understand this point:
The 77km position is based on their calculation of 3 days in the Indian context.
Others then tried to provide calculations based on the 18 or 15 farsakh view, however they miscalculated.
So the view is entirely sound, as it isn't based on the farsakh calculation, yes trying to proof it through the farsakh system is flawed.

In my opinion it is quite clear what the strongest position is - and yes, I say strongest and rely on the beforementioned 'ulama (Imam Ibn 'Abidin alone is proof enough for me) and their fatwas.

And I have clearly shown that the strongest position in the madhab is that it isn't calculated by distance, but rather changes based on time and place.

However due to the reasons I mentioned in my previous posts, I prefer the 48 Shar'i mile (88,8km) view

And Allah Ta'ala knows best

[Sunni Muslim]

Mufti Saheb - thanks for the good answers. Can you tell me the title of Shaykhul Hadiths work on this issue? Shukran.

[Husain]

The name is :
صحيح اور مناسب تر مسافت قصر


It is in Urdu.

[Sunni Muslim]

The name is :
صحيح اور مناسب تر مسافت قصر


It is in Urdu.

I wish it was translated into English! May be one of his learned students can one day publish it in English?

[fnaeem]

mufti saheb. not trying to stir a hornets nest or something. but just a quick glance over the post. it seems like different ulema did reach different conclusions on what distance can a person travel in 3 days.

Is that with or without the assistance of beasts of burden like camels ?

If it is with a means of assistance, why can we not take airplanes into account ?

Will that render the concept of qasr null and void because we can travel anywhere in the world in less than 3 days.

[al-Hanafi]

As-salamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullah,

JazakaLlah for your excellent and thorough answer soofi_saheb. I apprecitate you taking the time for it, may Allah bless you for your efforts.

1) So in your opinion the 16 farsakh position is the strongest one, even though you have quoted several authorities that say that the strongest position is to refrain from giving fatwa based on farsakhs?

Considering the fact that you can travel from Pakistan to England today in a very short time (I don't know, 4-6 hours by plane?) you must agree with me that even though in reality the strongest position is to refrain from giving fatwa on a distance but according to days, there is a real need to actually give a fatwa on a distance?

And from amongst those distances is it not true that most of our fuqaha gave fatwa based on 18 farsakhs instead of 16 farsakhs? This is what I meant when I referred to your own words - when you stated that many have given fatwa on 18 farsakhs or something to that effect.

And the fact that the 16 farsakhs fatwa agrees with the other madhhab is in my opinion actually a weakening of this position - not a strengthening of it, because the other madhhabs do not travel for three days (and nights) but less. I am not completely on sure ground here, but I think the Malikis travel one day while the Shaf'i'is and Hanbalis travel two days. Should their two days travel equal our three days? - We must be really lazy then

This is what the fatwa of the deoband 'ulama seems to be based upon. They say:

"Our teachers have travelled 12 kos every day, which means 16 miles. Because if every day six hours are set aside for travel, then a person walking normal speed can cover two kos every hour. According to this, the travelling distance has been set to 48 miles, meaning 36 kos" (Fatawa Dar al-'Ulum, vol. 4, page. 491-492).

So out of 24 hours, after sleeping, eating, praying and even relaxing, you only get 6 hours out of 24 for actual travel? This seems very little to me - try comparing to the Shafi'is and see that we must either be very lazy or they walk very fast.

We should at least be able to travel if not 24 miles (like the shafi'is) then at least 20 miles each day!

What are your thoughts on this? Do you really believe that covering 16 miles equals a days travel by walking?

2) Yes, I actually did open up some of the books (though not all, as I do not have them all). I looked it up in 'Umda al-Qari as well as Radd al-Muhtar, and Jadd al-Mumtar, but admittedly didn't look it up in Bahr al-Ra'iq or Fath al-Qadir and neither the Ghunya.

And let me show you what I meant by referring to them - and please notice the point that I am tring to make with these references in the end:

a) Bahr al-Ra'iq does mention that fatwa has been given on 18 farsakhs. It is another matter that he does not agree with giving fatwa on anything but three days travel, but in our time almost every scholar who ever gives a fatwa, gives a distance - not just "three days".

b) Ghunya al-Mutamalli also does mention the 18 farsakhs position as being the position given fatwa upon according to some of the mashaykh. Yes, I completely give you that he disagrees with it, but that is another matter.

c) Radd al-Muhtar does mentions the 18 farsakhs position as the fatwa position. Yes, he also mentions 15 farsakhs as the one preferred by some as the fatwa position and yes he disagrees with fixing it because it differs according to terrain - yet notice that he is at least not against estimating the positions into farsakhs.

d) 'Umda al-Qari says the following:

عن محمد ولم يريدوا به السير ليلاً ونهارا لأنهم جعلوا النهار للسير والليل للاستراحة ولو سلك طريقا هي مسيرة ثلاثة أيام وأمكنه أن يصل إليها في يوم من طريق أخرى قصر ثم قدروا ذلك بالفراسخ فقيل أحد وعشرون فرسخا وقيل ثمانية عشر وعليه الفتوي وقيل خمسة عشر فرسخا وإلى ثلاثة أيام ذهب عثمان بن عفان وابن مسعود وسويد بن غفلة والشعبي والنخعي والثوري وابن حيي وأبو قلابة وشريك بن عبد الله وسعيد بن جبير ومحمد بن سيرين وهو رواية عن عبد الله بن عمر

My point being that he mentions the distances and then states that the 18 farsakhs position is the fatwa position amongst them.

e) Jadd al-Mumtar, adds to the references to the 18 farsakhs position as being the preferred one among them, mentioning Al-Kifaya (which we have mentioned), al-Muhit, al-Fatawa al-Zahiriyya and others, after which Imam Ahmad Rida mentions al-Bahr, and then states:

وفي البحر عن النهاية، ثمّ ردّ عليه بما أجاب عنه الشيخ إسماعيل كما نقله في منحة الخالق

Point: Notice that of all the Hanafi sources, not even a single one mentions 16 farsakhs, but notice that they all mention 18 farsakhs. Yes, most of them disagree with putting it in farsakhs at all, but that was in their time. Today, there is a great need to put this in distance, because otherwise people can travel the whole world around in less than three days. And it is a fact that almost every scholar who gives a fatwa on this, does in fact give a distance in miles or km or whatever unit.

Sidi, I appreciate your quotes, but I do not see how they help your position of 16 farsakhs. Notice that 16 farsakhs isn't even mentioned at all in any of the earlier sources. Yes, you are right that the original fatwa (from Imam Abu Hanifa) is that travelling is three days but I never claimed that it was not the case. In our times, however you will give me that we must put this into a distance, otherwise people can travel the whole world around in less than three days!

And my point with those references was only to make it clear that what has been called the fatwa position by many of our giants, has been 18 farsakhs - not 16 nor 21 etc. My point is: Most of the 'ulama who have given a fatwa based on actual distance has been a fatwa upon 18 farsakhs. And if we should convert the travelling distance into an actual distance then this position has greater merit than all the others (15 or 21, and now this 16 farsakhs position).

Yes, the landscape has to be considered, but come on! With the 48 miles position we are travelleing 16 miles a day while the shafi'is are covering 24?! I have never seen a modern fatwa from any scholar who specified that the 77 km or the 88 km was for some specific terrain! These fatwas in our times are given to the general public and do not specify to which tarrain it applies! So don't give me that argument, and yet at the same time accepting 16 farsakhs as being the strongest position!

And furthermore: Most people do not walk three days distances anymore - people travel by car, or bus or something third. It makes very little difference for them if they are travelling through a desert or on a motorway - as long as there is a road! So there is no actual need to come up with a position of 16 farsakhs that no one among the earlier Hanafi giants even mentioned!

I will add a quote from 'Allama Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi from his Sharh Sahih Muslim. He says:

"According to the Ahnaf, the corresponding position to qasr is in truth the travel of three days that is covered by walking or riding a camel, while fulfilling the human needs, as we have just mentioned by (commenting) the quote of 'Allama 'Ayni. The later fuqaha have for the ease of Muslims estimated this in accordance to how many farsakhs this distance can be covered by. Some fuqaha have decided this travelling distance into 21 farsakhs, some into 15 farsakhs and the mufta bihi is the position of 18 farsakhs. In accordance to the changing of circumstances, the units of the travelling distance have been changing as well, and so it was first converted into english miles and was then measured by kilometers. Thus the 'ulama of this time have estimated the travelling distance in english miles" ('Allama Sa'idi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 11. edition (2003), pg. 366).

So in conclusion: I do not deny the fact that many of the earlier Hanafi scholars disagreed with fixing the travelling distance into farsakhs (or other units) as being correct. At the same time, I ask you to consider the fact that even though this was the case, many Hanafi 'ulama did in fact give fatwa based on three different distances - 15, 18 and 21 farsakhs (even then). And I ask you to consider the fact that most of them, preferred the 18 farsakhs position as the best of these three. None of them even mentioned 16 farsakhs.

In our time, when every scholar that I have ever heard of giving a fatwa on this issue actually does mention a distance (77 km, 88 km or 99 km), we can safely assume that the position among the Hanafi scholars in our time is that there is nothing wrong in doing so. And yes, of course the landscape does matter, but as roads have been made, and distances are normally covered by cars or other transportation vehicles, so this really isn't much of an issue anymore - which may be the reason that neither deobandi 'ulama nor others (to my knowledge) normally give different fatwas in accordance to different landscapes. And consider also the fact that if anything, we are able to cover more distance as a result of better roads (even walking) - not less than when the fuqaha preferred 18 farsaks.

I have given you my reservations regarding the 16 farsakhs position and even though you quoted it as a proof that this agrees with the other madhahib, this is ironically a proof against this position, because the Shafi'is only travel for two days while we travel for three. And in truth, it is very hard to believe that Hanafis would be so lazy that we would cover the same distance in three days that the Shafi'is would cover in two - this is too big a difference even if we assumption of how much one is able to travel a day is different from our madhhab to the Shafi'is madhhab.

And yes, I give you that the fatwa position was not a clear-cut as I initially suggested, but I meant in relation to the other farsakh-positions, while you may have understood that I denied the fact that rulings (in this context) depend on terrain - they do and I do not disagree with that. But I hold the 18 farsakhs = 61 miles = 99 km position to be the strongst and closest to what has been transmitted. And I give you that the deobandi 'ulama have the right to try to convert three days travel into what they deem fit, but I don't agree with their assumption that a normal person is able to walk only 16 miles a day. This is very weak in my opinion.

Wa Llahu wa Rasuluhu a'lam

Wa as-salamu 'alaykum
al-Hanafi

[al-Hanafi]

As-salamu 'alaykum,

Soofi_saheb,
Is this book available online? Living where I live, it is hard to come by books in Urdu or Arabic, so if it is online, please provide a link if possible.

JazakaLlah,

Wa as-salamu 'alaykum
al-Hanafi

[Husain]

You mentioned checking the mas'alah in Radd al-Muhtar.
If you just go back and read through the very same page in there again, you will find answer to most of what you mentioned in this post of yours.

I will just quickly go over a few points, as misunderstanding them seems to be the root of the problem:

1. When the Fuqaha say that the distance travelled in three days would change based on time and place, it DOES NOT mean that it will change based on the type on conveyance. Walking or the pace of a camel (which are similar) is what is taken into account. The Fuqaha have clearly stated that if a person travels in one day the distance normally traveled in 3 days on account of a fast conveyance, then he would still become a musafir.
If you have understood this, then the arguments about airplanes etc would be answered.

2. It isn't Deobandi Ulama who mentioned that you only count 6-7 hours daily. It is clearly mentioned in the Hashiyah of ibn Abidin, a few lines above the passage you quoted.
In fact you will find most of our Fuqaha mentioning in their works that all that is counted is travel from fajr until zawal, as in the Arab deserts, it became too hot to travel thereafter.
This is the view of the madhab and our Deobandi Ulama believe in holding fast to it.

If you have ever tried to travel a long distance walking, you would then understand it.
We are humans, not machines. Once a person walks for 6-7 hours non-stop he is exhausted. He then has to put up camp, prepare his meals, perform his salawat and have a good rest in preparation for the next days travel. Those who have experience of "pedal jamat" would understand this.

3. The other madhahib do not base their calculation upon time, but instead upon the hadith of 4 barid and the athar of sahabah.
It is only the hanafi madhab that mentioned time, instead of distance.

4. Two reasons for 2 days of travel in other madhahib equaling three in ours are:
a. Many of our Fuqaha say that the shortest days of the year should be used to calculate it ie. from fajr to zawal, during the shortest day of the year.
b. The other madhahib probably don't stipulate until zawal, but rather use more hours.

5. The 48 shari'i miles view has nothing to do with a view of 16 farsakhs in the madhab.
The madhab does not specify distance, thus a person could calculate any distance that equals 3 days travel and be correct. This could range from 30 to 130 km.
In the light of this, taking the distance as 48 shar'i miles, is not contradictory to the madhab.

6. No one is saying that you don't mention a distance when giving fatwa to people. Everyone says that you do. What they are saying is that this distance is not set, rather it is the equivalent of three days journey, based on the type of terrian being covered.
The Ulama of each place are expected to calculate the equivalent of three days travel in the country/area and give fatwa accordingly.

7. No one in the world is doubting that fatwa has been given on 18 farsakh, just as it has been given on nearly a dozen other distances. What we are trying to explain to you is that those who gave it on 18, did so on the basis of them calculating 3 days travel to equal that amount. They clearly did not say that this fatwa of theirs is now applicable to every place and time.
A perfect example is the author of Muhit, from whom Kifayah and from him Ahmed Radha khan took the view that the fatwa is on 18 farsakhs.
We find the author of Muhit mentioning that his mashaikh calculated it in different amounts, then gave fatwa on 18 as it was in between..
However, he then said that if one is traveling in mountainous terrain, then he should calculate it accordingly to three days travel therein.

If you have properly understood these points, then you would have answers to everything in your post.

1) So in your opinion the 16 farsakh position is the strongest one, even though you have quoted several authorities that say that the strongest position is to refrain from giving fatwa based on farsakhs?

Answered in point 5

Considering the fact that you can travel from Pakistan to England today in a very short time (I don't know, 4-6 hours by plane?) you must agree with me that even though in reality the strongest position is to refrain from giving fatwa on a distance but according to days, there is a real need to actually give a fatwa on a distance?

Answered in points 1 and 6

And from amongst those distances is it not true that most of our fuqaha gave fatwa based on 18 farsakhs instead of 16 farsakhs? This is what I meant when I referred to your own words - when you stated that many have given fatwa on 18 farsakhs or something to that effect.

Point 7

And the fact that the 16 farsakhs fatwa agrees with the other madhhab is in my opinion actually a weakening of this position - not a strengthening of it, because the other madhhabs do not travel for three days (and nights) but less. I am not completely on sure ground here, but I think the Malikis travel one day while the Shaf'i'is and Hanbalis travel two days. Should their two days travel equal our three days? - We must be really lazy then

This is what the fatwa of the deoband 'ulama seems to be based upon. They say:

"Our teachers have travelled 12 kos every day, which means 16 miles. Because if every day six hours are set aside for travel, then a person walking normal speed can cover two kos every hour. According to this, the travelling distance has been set to 48 miles, meaning 36 kos" (Fatawa Dar al-'Ulum, vol. 4, page. 491-492).

So out of 24 hours, after sleeping, eating, praying and even relaxing, you only get 6 hours out of 24 for actual travel? This seems very little to me - try comparing to the Shafi'is and see that we must either be very lazy or they walk very fast.

We should at least be able to travel if not 24 miles (like the shafi'is) then at least 20 miles each day!

What are your thoughts on this? Do you really believe that covering 16 miles equals a days travel by walking?

Points 2,3,4

And let me show you what I meant by referring to them - and please notice the point that I am tring to make with these references in the end:

a) Bahr al-Ra'iq does mention that fatwa has been given on 18 farsakhs. It is another matter that he does not agree with giving fatwa on anything but three days travel, but in our time almost every scholar who ever gives a fatwa, gives a distance - not just "three days".

They mentioned that fatwa was given on a distance, yet they clearly disagred with that.
If you had , hen quoting them, said that "these giants all mentioned that fatwa was given on a distance, inspite of them disagreeing" then it wouldn't have been a problem.

Instead you said that
- they all mentioned it to be the clear-cut fatwa position in the madhab
- You claimed it to be their fatawa
- You claimed that they wouldn't have given fatwa on this view if it wasn't the fatwa position
- You claimed that they knew that they knew that rulings change, yet still gave fatwa on this postion.

Instead of clutching at straws trying to defend the misquotes, just be open. You obviously didn't know that these giants refuted that view after quoting it.
Your source obviously didn't tell you that.
If you had known, I am sure that you wouldn't have made the outlandish claims that you mentioned.

c) ... yet notice that he is at least not against estimating the positions into farsakhs.

Point 6

e) Jadd al-Mumtar, adds to the references to the 18 farsakhs position as being the preferred one among them, mentioning Al-Kifaya (which we have mentioned), al-Muhit, al-Fatawa al-Zahiriyya and others, after which Imam Ahmad Rida mentions al-Bahr, and then states:

وفي البحر عن النهاية، ثمّ ردّ عليه بما أجاب عنه الشيخ إسماعيل كما نقله في منحة الخالق

Al-Kifayah took it from al-muhit, while Zahiriyyah was in the same time as muhit, so they were referring to the fatwa of their time.

See the answer of Sh. Ismail, and let me know if it helps your case in any way.

Point: Notice that of all the Hanafi sources, not even a single one mentions 16 farsakhs, but notice that they all mention 18 farsakhs.

Point 5

Yes, most of them disagree with putting it in farsakhs at all, but that was in their time. Today, there is a great need to put this in distance, because otherwise people can travel the whole world around in less than three days.

Point 1

And it is a fact that almost every scholar who gives a fatwa on this, does in fact give a distance in miles or km or whatever unit.

Point 6

Sidi, I appreciate your quotes, but I do not see how they help your position of 16 farsakhs. Notice that 16 farsakhs isn't even mentioned at all in any of the earlier sources.

Point 5

Yes, you are right that the original fatwa (from Imam Abu Hanifa) is that travelling is three days but I never claimed that it was not the case. In our times, however you will give me that we must put this into a distance, otherwise people can travel the whole world around in less than three days!

Point 1

And my point with those references was only to make it clear that what has been called the fatwa position by many of our giants, has been 18 farsakhs - not 16 nor 21 etc. My point is: Most of the 'ulama who have given a fatwa based on actual distance has been a fatwa upon 18 farsakhs. And if we should convert the travelling distance into an actual distance then this position has greater merit than all the others (15 or 21, and now this 16 farsakhs position).

Point 7

Yes, the landscape has to be considered, but come on! With the 48 miles position we are travelleing 16 miles a day while the shafi'is are covering 24?!

Point 2

And furthermore: Most people do not walk three days distances anymore - people travel by car, or bus or something third. It makes very little difference for them if they are travelling through a desert or on a motorway - as long as there is a road!

Point 1, again

I will add a quote from 'Allama Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi from his Sharh Sahih Muslim. He says:

"According to the Ahnaf, the corresponding position to qasr is in truth the travel of three days that is covered by walking or riding a camel, while fulfilling the human needs, as we have just mentioned by (commenting) the quote of 'Allama 'Ayni. The later fuqaha have for the ease of Muslims estimated this in accordance to how many farsakhs this distance can be covered by. Some fuqaha have decided this travelling distance into 21 farsakhs, some into 15 farsakhs and the mufta bihi is the position of 18 farsakhs. In accordance to the changing of circumstances, the units of the travelling distance have been changing as well, and so it was first converted into english miles and was then measured by kilometers. Thus the 'ulama of this time have estimated the travelling distance in english miles" ('Allama Sa'idi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 11. edition (2003), pg. 366).

Seems completely irrelevant.

So in conclusion: I do not deny the fact that many of the earlier Hanafi scholars disagreed with fixing the travelling distance into farsakhs (or other units) as being correct. At the same time, I ask you to consider the fact that even though this was the case, many Hanafi 'ulama did in fact give fatwa based on three different distances - 15, 18 and 21 farsakhs (even then). And I ask you to consider the fact that most of them, preferred the 18 farsakhs position as the best of these three.

Point 7

None of them even mentioned 16 farsakhs.

Point 5

In our time, when every scholar that I have ever heard of giving a fatwa on this issue actually does mention a distance (77 km, 88 km or 99 km), we can safely assume that the position among the Hanafi scholars in our time is that there is nothing wrong in doing so.

Point 6

And yes, of course the landscape does matter, but as roads have been made, and distances are normally covered by cars or other transportation vehicles, so this really isn't much of an issue anymore - i

Point 1

And consider also the fact that if anything, we are able to cover more distance as a result of better roads (even walking) - not less than when the fuqaha preferred 18 farsaks.

Let me ask you a question.
If an average person, in any western country, has to travel for a month walking, such that every day he will have to walk, such an amount that will not tire him out so much, that he will be knocked out the next day.
How many kilometres can an average person walk in this manner daily?

I personally think that if you are going to calculate in this manner, then 15km a day is a maximum. I spent time in pedal jamat, where an avarage of 10km would be walked daily. 15 was a maximum, then everyone would be knocked out.
So claiming that people today can easily walk more than 30km daily, for a number of days continuosly, seems terribly illogical, regardless of the quality of the roads.

I have given you my reservations regarding the 16 farsakhs position and even though you quoted it as a proof that this agrees with the other madhahib, this is ironically a proof against this position, because the Shafi'is only travel for two days while we travel for three. And in truth, it is very hard to believe that Hanafis would be so lazy that we would cover the same distance in three days that the Shafi'is would cover in two - this is too big a difference even if we assumption of how much one is able to travel a day is different from our madhhab to the Shafi'is madhhab.

Points 2, 3,4,5

And yes, I give you that the fatwa position was not a clear-cut as I initially suggested, but I meant in relation to the other farsakh-positions, while you may have understood that I denied the fact that rulings (in this context) depend on terrain - they do and I do not disagree with that. But I hold the 18 farsakhs = 61 miles = 99 km position to be the strongst and closest to what has been transmitted.

Point 7

And I give you that the deobandi 'ulama have the right to try to convert three days travel into what they deem fit, but I don't agree with their assumption that a normal person is able to walk only 16 miles a day. This is very weak in my opinion.

Point 2 and above.

I hope it is now clear that the Ulama giving fatwa on 3 days= 77km are sticking perfectly to the madhab and are practicing on the strongest view in the madhab.
It is also clear that the 88km view is in accordance with the madhab and is sound in its proof and it the most suitable view for fatwa.

And Allah Ta'ala knows best

[MRahman]

Salaam - just reading the posts - from all your excellent reasearch and input, Ive gathered that the strongest opinion is 3 days and nights
(correct me if i'm wrong). Thus how do you say 3days = 77k is the strongest view in the madhab. Wouldnt any calculation based on 3 days be the strongest.

What i dont understand - 77k must have been calculated based on certain terrain, time etc. So how is this a strong opinion even though there are no giants who refer to it being even an opinion. Yes it is a valid opinion - no problem - but what makes it the strongest opinion in the madhab.

If anything it should be left at 3 days - but then problem occurs - as there will be differences accordingly.

Please clarify why 77K is the strongest opinion - not why 3 days is - we know 3 days os the strongest because everyone agrees on it in the madhab.

Also, if you could clairfy why 88k is your prefered fatwa.

Jazakallahu ahsanal jazaa

[Ahqar al-Abd]

assalamu alaikum

it is a good discussion in here. i want to ask . 1) is it wrong to say it could be 99 km also... 2) shouldn't we not, according to the countries we live in, also measure the distance ourselves and give our own fatwa like the ulama did? they lived 100 years ago in india, but now we live in west 100 years after, is not a new fatwa is required then?