Is the duration of residence specified by a certain number of days?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Do we specify the duration of residence by a certain number of days?
The Shaykh : There is scholarly disagreement on this issue.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It reaches about ten opinions, and the most correct opinion in it, in my view, is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) chose, which is that there is no limit to the duration that terminates the ruling of travel, as long as this man intends that when he finishes his work, he will return to his homeland. He is a traveler who has not taken it as a home or a base. This is what we see in this issue. I have examined much of what those who set a limit used as evidence, and I did not find in it anything that indicates a limit; rather, it is a duration that occurred by coincidence, not by intention.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And what occurs by coincidence is not considered legislation. An example of this is that those who limited it to four days used as evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) arrived in Makkah on the fourth day of Dhul-Hijjah in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And he stayed for four days, then he went out to Mina on the eighth day. He was shortening the prayer during this period until he returned to Madinah, as Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) mentioned. They said, "This is evidence that the duration which does not terminate the ruling of travel is only four days." And it is known to every examiner that this duration occurred by coincidence. If the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had arrived on the third day, that is, five days before going out to Mina, he would have shortened the prayer even if this ruling had not existed. And if this had not been the ruling, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would have clarified it to his Ummah, because he knows that some pilgrims arrive on the third day, some on the second day, and some before the month of Dhul-Hijjah begins. If the ruling differed between one who arrived on the fourth day and one who arrived on the third day, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would have clarified it to his Ummah, because Allah the Exalted obligated him to convey the message. He said:[Al-Ma'idah 5:67] And He the Exalted and Majestic said: [Ali 'Imran 3:20] And He the Exalted said: [Al-Ma'idah 5:92].
So the result is that this is an example of those who set a limit, and as you saw, it does not indicate a limit. Also, among the scholars, some limited it to fifteen days, as in the school of Abu Hanifah, and some limited it to nineteen days, as Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) mentioned. But the stronger opinion in my view is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah chose, which is that there is no limit to the duration of residence that terminates the ruling of travel, as long as the man intends to return to his homeland and has taken this city merely to fulfill a need. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah bless you. This listener is Turkhan Fikrat Bashar from Iraq, Kirkuk.
The Shaykh : There is scholarly disagreement on this issue.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : It reaches about ten opinions, and the most correct opinion in it, in my view, is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) chose, which is that there is no limit to the duration that terminates the ruling of travel, as long as this man intends that when he finishes his work, he will return to his homeland. He is a traveler who has not taken it as a home or a base. This is what we see in this issue. I have examined much of what those who set a limit used as evidence, and I did not find in it anything that indicates a limit; rather, it is a duration that occurred by coincidence, not by intention.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And what occurs by coincidence is not considered legislation. An example of this is that those who limited it to four days used as evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) arrived in Makkah on the fourth day of Dhul-Hijjah in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And he stayed for four days, then he went out to Mina on the eighth day. He was shortening the prayer during this period until he returned to Madinah, as Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) mentioned. They said, "This is evidence that the duration which does not terminate the ruling of travel is only four days." And it is known to every examiner that this duration occurred by coincidence. If the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had arrived on the third day, that is, five days before going out to Mina, he would have shortened the prayer even if this ruling had not existed. And if this had not been the ruling, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would have clarified it to his Ummah, because he knows that some pilgrims arrive on the third day, some on the second day, and some before the month of Dhul-Hijjah begins. If the ruling differed between one who arrived on the fourth day and one who arrived on the third day, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would have clarified it to his Ummah, because Allah the Exalted obligated him to convey the message. He said:
O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord
يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما أنزل إليك من ربكupon you is only the [duty of] notification
فإنما عليك البلاغthen know that upon Our Messenger is only [the responsibility for] clear notification.
فاعلموا أنما على رسولنا البلاغ المبينSo the result is that this is an example of those who set a limit, and as you saw, it does not indicate a limit. Also, among the scholars, some limited it to fifteen days, as in the school of Abu Hanifah, and some limited it to nineteen days, as Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) mentioned. But the stronger opinion in my view is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah chose, which is that there is no limit to the duration of residence that terminates the ruling of travel, as long as the man intends to return to his homeland and has taken this city merely to fulfill a need. Yes.
The questioner : May Allah bless you. This listener is Turkhan Fikrat Bashar from Iraq, Kirkuk.