The ruling on shortening and combining prayers for a traveler who knows he will stay in a town for ten days.

The questioner : ... These young men are new to da'wah (calling to Islam), and a discussion arose between me and them. Based on what my honorable brother mentioned, regarding shortening the prayer, they have their argument, and there is evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) shortened the prayer in Makkah for eighteen days, and Ibn 'Umar for six months while shortening the prayer... As for combining, one of them comes from al-Karak or from any place and identifies that we will stay in Amman for ten days to correct exam papers.

The Shaykh : May Allah give rain to the one who gave me rain.

The questioner : I mean, we say, yes, we will stay in Amman for at least ten days. I see them combining the Dhuhr and 'Asr prayers, and the Maghrib and 'Isha' prayers, throughout their stay in Amman. They do not settle for just shortening, but add combining to it. What is your opinion on that?

The Shaykh : Okay, are you saying not to talk about shortening?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, you talk about combining?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Which one is more important in your opinion?

The questioner : By Allah, both matters are important. As for shortening, they say we are of the opinion that if one shortens...

The Shaykh : A deviation, a deviation is recorded against you. Be careful, a deviation is being recorded against you, because the question was which one is more important to you? Do you remember what your answer was?

The questioner : Both matters are important.

The Shaykh : Ah, so that is the answer.

The questioner : I mean, combining...

The Shaykh : I am saying, I say like you, both are important, but I repeat the question: which one is more important? You repeat the answer, I don't think so.

The questioner : The most important point that confused me...

The Shaykh : No problem, relax. You relax. You answer with what you have. If you are correct, we are with you. And if you are wrong, we are with you, meaning we point out the error so that you are correct.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : Which one is more important?

The questioner : Combining is the more important one.

The Shaykh : Your companion has trapped you.

The questioner : My opinion, of course, through my humble study, and I am still a simple student.

The Shaykh : There is blessing in you.

The questioner : Shortening, I mean, when I discussed it with them, I said to them...

The Shaykh : Leave them alone. Now you present your opinion on the subject.

The questioner : My opinion is that I say combining is for one who is not a traveler, and who has arrived in a town and settled there...

The Shaykh : It is not permissible?

The questioner : It is not permissible.

The Shaykh : And shortening?

The questioner : Shortening is permissible as long as the duration...

The Shaykh : Subhan Allah, you see that you are speaking. This is your luck, even if you are wrong. And as it is said: "Perhaps a sin..." A man from your town.
Abu Ishaq: Al-Iskandari.
The student : Yes, "Perhaps a sin that led to humiliation and brokenness is better than an act of obedience that led to pride and arrogance."

The Shaykh : Yes, the matter is the opposite, Professor. First: Combining and shortening for the traveler are two linked matters in terms of permissibility. Whoever is a traveler combines and shortens, correct?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : And if it is said that shortening is not permissible, then a fortiori combining is not permissible. And if it is said that combining is not permissible, shortening is not permissible. This is because both are among the rulings of travel. But which one is more important? Shortening in travel or combining? The answer is that shortening is more important. Why? Because the traveler does not have the option to complete the prayer, but he has the option not to combine. Is this clear?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So if you see or criticize people who are staying in Amman and they are travelers, and they combine, but in your opinion they are not travelers because they settled for ten days as you say.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So in your opinion, they have exited the status of being travelers, and thus they do not combine. But if that is the case, they do not shorten, because shortening is among the rulings of travel. So as long as they are not travelers, they have no right to shorten and no right to combine, because they are not travelers. But even so, the issue of shortening remains more important than combining. Because shortening, first, is obligatory in travel, not just permissible. That is, the traveler does not have the choice to complete if he wishes or shorten if he wishes; rather, shortening is obligatory upon him. Whereas combining, he has the choice: if he wishes, he combines, and if he wishes, he separates and prays each prayer in its time. And this is a very important distinction for the traveler. And another distinction is that combining the two prayers is not a specific characteristic of travel, unlike shortening, which is a specific characteristic of travel. Whereas combining, a person can combine while he is a resident.

The questioner: Correct.

The Shaykh : So if you reverse it, you pour it out. You criticize them if they shorten, and do not criticize them if they combine, because combining is permissible for them even if they are residents.

The questioner : In the hadith of 'Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) in this chapter...

The Shaykh : Relax about it. Yes, what does it say?

The questioner : That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to combine...

The Shaykh : Relax about it. Whoever said it, relax. The hadith is weak and not authentic.

The questioner : It is not authentic to cite it?

The Shaykh : It is not authentic.

The Shaykh : Your right, Professor.
Abu Ishaq: My right.

The questioner : ... If you permit me, sir, what I understood from you now is that if a person travels to a town and knows that he will stay there for ten days, meaning with certainty, or more than four days according to the opinion of the jurists as they... as they defined it as four days, excluding the day of entry and the day of exit. Do I complete the prayer in your opinion, or do I not shorten and combine? This is my question.

The Shaykh : Your answer is in your narration of the athar of Ibn 'Umar. What is the athar of Ibn 'Umar that you told us earlier?
The student : He forgot.

The Shaykh : It is not time for him to forget, but as it is said, every newcomer is amazed. He is amazed now. Did we not tell you earlier that Ibn 'Umar, when he was there for six months...

The questioner : Yes, six months.

The Shaykh : Why did he shorten for six months?

The questioner : Because he did not know the duration of the stay.

The Shaykh : He did not know the duration of the stay... No, excuse me, why did he combine and why did he not know the duration of the stay?

The questioner : Because the snow was falling on them.

The Shaykh : This is the answer.

The questioner : The snow was falling on them and he did not know when he would depart.

The Shaykh : So this snow, which is like mountains, I mean, do you not imagine with me that 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar was certainly judging that he would not be able to walk after ten days because these mountains of snow would not disappear or melt within these few days. I mean, do you imagine that he was saying, as some jurists say today, "I will travel tomorrow, I will travel tomorrow, I will travel"? This is imagination. Or was the matter not clear to you?

The questioner : No, it is clear, because Ibn 'Umar knew that his stay would be prolonged.

The Shaykh : The important thing is to know that the traveler is a traveler, and it has no relation to the number of days he wants to stay, but rather in his overall situation, if I may say so. So this is the traveler. I mean, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in the Battle of Fath, I think, for sixteen days.

The questioner : Eighteen days.

The Shaykh : Eighteen days. When he led the army, especially since he is the greatest Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), when he conquered Makkah until the matters settled after this great conquest, do you imagine that he did not intend to stay for six, seven days, or more than that?

The questioner : Yes, there is no harm in that.

The Shaykh : Because preparing the matters, organizing them, appointing a leader for a group and for a tribe, and so on, especially since the groups are tribal, and so on, and managing the affairs. This takes time, time. The leader entrusted with this matter knows that the issue will not be resolved in two, three, or four days. Therefore, when he was conquering lands, he did not stay in them for one or two or three or four days, as in the narration in the Battle of Tabuk, he stayed there for twenty days. Even if 'Ali ibn Zayd ibn Jad'an was in it. The point is that this condition has no value: that a person descended in a town and estimated that he would stay there for five days. He does not become a resident by that. He is still in a state of readiness for travel. So as long as he is still, as Allah the Exalted said: , he is a traveler and the rulings of travel apply to him. These groups, if they came from a town between al-Karak and descended here, if this is considered travel in the custom of people today and they will return there, they are travelers, unless they intend to settle in this place, not intending to return to where they came from. The important thing is that these four days have no evidence for them, because if he intends them, he becomes a resident even if he is on a journey.