The Shaykh prayed as a follower while traveling, and the imam shortened the prayer but the Shaykh did not, so he was asked about that?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : Why did you complete the prayer?
The Shaykh : Because I did not intend to travel.
The questioner : Please give us a bit more clarification.
The Shaykh : Why did you shorten the prayer?
The questioner : I shortened it based on what I heard from you.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner : That we are travelers.
The Shaykh : Where did you hear that from me?
The questioner : I mean, within the scope of what I was asked, I heard from Abu Salih regarding the distance and so on.
The Shaykh : I heard that just now. As for before, well, what I heard from you was that a person is considered a traveler as long as he moves from one place to another, seeking, for example, pasture or grass or something similar. That is a different matter from what we are discussing. We left our town to return in the evening, yes. So, in my understanding, the issue does not relate to covering a specific distance, but rather to two things: the foundation is intention, and the other is leaving the town. If the intention to travel is present and one leaves the town, the rulings of travel apply, and after that, one does not look at whether the distance covered is long or short. However, if the fundamental element, which is intention, is absent, then the one who leaves, even if he covers a long distance or less or more, is not a traveler, because travel is among the rulings connected to this hadith, which some scholars of Islam said is one-third of Islam:Sahih al-Bukhari 1.
And the truth is that this is one of the very delicate issues in which the views of scholars have differed, and they have not agreed on anything clear at all, such that a person could say:
This is the truth, with no obscurity, so leave me alone regarding the intentions of the path.
No one can say this, but all he can say is that he chooses such and such. So I chose what I understood from the treatise of Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) on this issue. He has a specific treatise on the rulings of travel, in which he gives a very excellent example that helps the researcher and student of knowledge understand that travel is not related to covering a long distance as opposed to a short one. As for it not being related to covering a short distance, I think that is not a point of discussion.
Because it is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he used to leave Madinah to al-Baqi' to greet the martyrs, then return. He used to go to the martyrs at Uhud to greet them, then return. He did not consider himself a traveler, even though he left the town. And conversely, if one intends a long journey, excuse me, if one covers a long distance, that does not mean, merely by covering that distance, that he has become a traveler. The example he gave is as follows:
He is from Damascus, like me, and around Damascus there are well-known villages. He gave the example of a town known to this day as Dumat al-Jandal. He said, if a man leaves Damascus seeking hunting to Dumat al-Jandal, which is fifteen kilometers away, there is no doubt that this distance, in our custom, if the fundamental condition, which is the intention to travel, is present, it is travel. He said, and he took with him that this man is not considered a traveler because he left to hunt and then return. But what happened was that he did not find the game he was seeking, so he continued the journey, and continued, and continued, until he reached Aleppo. Between Aleppo and Damascus is about four hundred kilometers today by car. We say this is not a traveler, even though he covered distances that are not a single distance for a traveler, because the first condition, which is the intention to travel, was not in this person. And on this basis, we can say that a car driver who leaves early in the morning from, for example, Amman to Ma'an to Aqaba and returns in the evening is not a traveler, because by virtue of his work he is constantly traveling; he only intends to perform the work to make a living. So we must note in the matter of travel the fundamental condition, which is intention. And by observing this intention, the ruling differs...
The ruling differs for two people who cover the same distance, but one is a traveler and the other is not considered a traveler, due to the difference in their intentions. And on this basis, rulings also branch out regarding the ruling of residence, meaning temporary residence. Two men left a town as travelers, and both stayed in another town. One has the residence of a traveler, and the other is a resident. Why?
Because he has another wife there. He has another wife, so he goes from one wife to another. The fact that he has a wife who provides him with security and makes a home for him and prepares his lodging, he takes a ruling different from his companion's ruling, because the situation differed in some of its aspects. And therefore we arrive at a very important conclusion, which is that the rulings of travel, despite their precision, differ from person to person. And at that time, we do not burden a person with another ruling, and the reverse is also the case. Rather, the one obligated should adopt an opinion that he is at peace with...
Here, custom is very necessary for the one who intended to travel, yes. As for the one who did not intend to travel, he is not bound by it.
The questioner : Regarding the issue of travel, O Shaykh, a person entered a specific mosque and was a traveler. He found a group praying in the road mosque—meaning—he thought that the imam praying with them was a regular, resident imam. So he completed the prayer on the basis that he was completing his prayer, let us say the afternoon prayer, four rak'ahs. But the imam prayed two rak'ahs and said the taslim, and said, "Complete your prayer, for we are people of travel." What does this follower do, who intended four rak'ahs on the ruling that he was following a resident, then it became clear to him that the imam was a traveler? What does he do?
The Shaykh : He says the taslim with the imam. He says the taslim with the imam, because what justified his intention was a mistake, so he returns to the correct ruling.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
The questioner : Why did you complete the prayer?
The Shaykh : Because I did not intend to travel.
The questioner : Please give us a bit more clarification.
The Shaykh : Why did you shorten the prayer?
The questioner : I shortened it based on what I heard from you.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner : That we are travelers.
The Shaykh : Where did you hear that from me?
The questioner : I mean, within the scope of what I was asked, I heard from Abu Salih regarding the distance and so on.
The Shaykh : I heard that just now. As for before, well, what I heard from you was that a person is considered a traveler as long as he moves from one place to another, seeking, for example, pasture or grass or something similar. That is a different matter from what we are discussing. We left our town to return in the evening, yes. So, in my understanding, the issue does not relate to covering a specific distance, but rather to two things: the foundation is intention, and the other is leaving the town. If the intention to travel is present and one leaves the town, the rulings of travel apply, and after that, one does not look at whether the distance covered is long or short. However, if the fundamental element, which is intention, is absent, then the one who leaves, even if he covers a long distance or less or more, is not a traveler, because travel is among the rulings connected to this hadith, which some scholars of Islam said is one-third of Islam:
The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended.
إنما الأعمال بالنيات وإنما لكل امرئ ما نوىAnd the truth is that this is one of the very delicate issues in which the views of scholars have differed, and they have not agreed on anything clear at all, such that a person could say:
This is the truth, with no obscurity, so leave me alone regarding the intentions of the path.
No one can say this, but all he can say is that he chooses such and such. So I chose what I understood from the treatise of Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) on this issue. He has a specific treatise on the rulings of travel, in which he gives a very excellent example that helps the researcher and student of knowledge understand that travel is not related to covering a long distance as opposed to a short one. As for it not being related to covering a short distance, I think that is not a point of discussion.
Because it is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he used to leave Madinah to al-Baqi' to greet the martyrs, then return. He used to go to the martyrs at Uhud to greet them, then return. He did not consider himself a traveler, even though he left the town. And conversely, if one intends a long journey, excuse me, if one covers a long distance, that does not mean, merely by covering that distance, that he has become a traveler. The example he gave is as follows:
He is from Damascus, like me, and around Damascus there are well-known villages. He gave the example of a town known to this day as Dumat al-Jandal. He said, if a man leaves Damascus seeking hunting to Dumat al-Jandal, which is fifteen kilometers away, there is no doubt that this distance, in our custom, if the fundamental condition, which is the intention to travel, is present, it is travel. He said, and he took with him that this man is not considered a traveler because he left to hunt and then return. But what happened was that he did not find the game he was seeking, so he continued the journey, and continued, and continued, until he reached Aleppo. Between Aleppo and Damascus is about four hundred kilometers today by car. We say this is not a traveler, even though he covered distances that are not a single distance for a traveler, because the first condition, which is the intention to travel, was not in this person. And on this basis, we can say that a car driver who leaves early in the morning from, for example, Amman to Ma'an to Aqaba and returns in the evening is not a traveler, because by virtue of his work he is constantly traveling; he only intends to perform the work to make a living. So we must note in the matter of travel the fundamental condition, which is intention. And by observing this intention, the ruling differs...
The ruling differs for two people who cover the same distance, but one is a traveler and the other is not considered a traveler, due to the difference in their intentions. And on this basis, rulings also branch out regarding the ruling of residence, meaning temporary residence. Two men left a town as travelers, and both stayed in another town. One has the residence of a traveler, and the other is a resident. Why?
Because he has another wife there. He has another wife, so he goes from one wife to another. The fact that he has a wife who provides him with security and makes a home for him and prepares his lodging, he takes a ruling different from his companion's ruling, because the situation differed in some of its aspects. And therefore we arrive at a very important conclusion, which is that the rulings of travel, despite their precision, differ from person to person. And at that time, we do not burden a person with another ruling, and the reverse is also the case. Rather, the one obligated should adopt an opinion that he is at peace with...
Here, custom is very necessary for the one who intended to travel, yes. As for the one who did not intend to travel, he is not bound by it.
The questioner : Regarding the issue of travel, O Shaykh, a person entered a specific mosque and was a traveler. He found a group praying in the road mosque—meaning—he thought that the imam praying with them was a regular, resident imam. So he completed the prayer on the basis that he was completing his prayer, let us say the afternoon prayer, four rak'ahs. But the imam prayed two rak'ahs and said the taslim, and said, "Complete your prayer, for we are people of travel." What does this follower do, who intended four rak'ahs on the ruling that he was following a resident, then it became clear to him that the imam was a traveler? What does he do?
The Shaykh : He says the taslim with the imam. He says the taslim with the imam, because what justified his intention was a mistake, so he returns to the correct ruling.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.