The Salaah of a woman who travelled the safar distance in the state of haidh

Answered according to Hanafi Fiqh by Muftionline.co.za

Q: I would like to find out the Shar’ee ruling regarding a woman who travels the safar distance in the state of haidh, and only becomes clean upon reaching her destination. If she intends staying for less than fifteen days at her destination, will she perform full Salaah or will she make qasar? I am a student studying in a Madrasah and I always understood that a woman who travels in haidh will perform full Salaah at her destination if she becomes clean at her destination. However, another student who is in the final year recently mentioned to me that there are two opinions in this maslah and that the more correct opinion is that she will perform qasar Salaah at her destination. The student supported his claim by presenting four arguments.

The first argument is that when a woman in haidh travels during the month of Ramadhaan, her intention for travelling is considered and she receives the concession of not fasting.

The second argument is that when a woman in haidh enters into ihraam, her intention of entering into ihraam is considered. When the intention of a woman travelling in haidh is considered in these two masaail, why is her intention not considered for the concession of qasar Salaah when she becomes clean at her destination?

The third argument he presented is that when a kaafir travels the safar distance and accepts Islam upon reaching his destination, he will make qasar. When a kaafir will make qasar, why should a woman who travels in the state of haidh not make qasar?

The fourth argument he presented is that from the Hanafi jurists, this view (that the woman will perform qasar when she becomes clean at her destination) was held by Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), who is the most senior Faqih from all the Hanafi Fuqaha who have discussed this maslah in their kitaabs. Hence, his view is the strongest and it should be preferred over the view of the other Fuqaha.

Mufti Saheb, could you explain to me the reasoning of the student, as I do not understand it, and could you explain to me whether the reasoning is correct and conforms to the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab? If what the student said is incorrect, then could you provide me with the correct explanation of these masaail?

Bismillaah

A: In regard to a woman travelling the safar distance in the state of haidh, there are two views recorded in the Hanafi Mazhab.

The first view is that she will perform full Salaah at her destination. The majority scholars of the Hanafi Mazhab have chosen this view and this is the preferred view of the Hanafi Mazhab. This is the view of the author of Al-Haawi, Allaamah Abu Bakr Al-Haseeri Al-Bukhaari, the author of Fataawa Zaheeriyyah, Allaamah Zaheeruddeen, the author of Fataawa Ghiyaasiyyah, Allaamah Dawood bin Yusuf Al-Khateeb, the author of Taataarkhaaniyah, Allaamah Fareeduddeen Aalim bin Alaa, the author of Al-Binaayah, Allaamah Badruddeen Aini, the author of Kabeeri, Allaamah Ebrahim Halabi, the author of Addurrul Mukhtaar, Allaamah Haskafi, the author of Haashiyatut Tahtaawi Aladdurril Mukhtaar, Allaamah Tahtaawi, the author of Raddul Muhtaar, Allaamah Ibnu Aabideen Shaami and others (Rahimahumullah).

The second view is that she will perform qasar Salaah at her destination. This is the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani and Allaamah Shurumbulaali (Rahimahumallah). It was this second view to which the student was referring when he said that it is the more correct view in the Hanafi Mazhab. However, this is incorrect, as we have explained that the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab is the first view, not the second view.

The arguments presented by the student for preferring the second view do not seem consistent with the other masaail of Deen and are hence incorrect. Below we will present the proofs of the student and thereafter explain, in detail, the reasons for the arguments not being consistent with the other masaail of Deen, as well as the reasons for the first view being the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab.

First Proof

The first proof is that when a woman in the state of haidh travels the safar distance, then on account of the safar, Shariah gives her the concession not to fast in the month of Ramadhaan. When Shariah has given her concession not to fast in the month of Ramadhaan, then this indicates that her intention of travelling is considered and that she is mukallaf of fasting. Hence, she receives the concession for not fasting during the safar. Therefore, when Shariah gives her concession not to fast during safar, then why will she not receive the concession of qasar when travelling for the safar distance in the state of haidh?

Second Proof

The second proof is that when a woman enters into ihraam in the state of haidh, then her ihraam will be regarded as valid, despite her being in the state of haidh.

In both the abovementioned masaail, the common aspect is that the intention of a woman who is in the state of haidh is considered and she is treated as mukallaf. In the case of fasting, the concession of not fasting during the journey in the month of Ramadhaan applies to her as it applies to a baaligh male who is travelling for the distance of safar during the month of Ramadhaan. Similarly, in the case of entering into ihraam and passing the miqaat, she is treated like a mukallaf and her intention of ihraam is considered, despite her being in the state of haidh. The fact that Shariah has given her the same concession that is given to a baaligh male who is entering into ihraam proves that she is mukallaf, despite her being in the state of haidh.

Third Proof

The third proof the student presented refers to the maslah of a kaafir who travels for the distance of safar and upon reaching his destination, accepts Islam. The safar that he had undertaken in the state of kufr is considered and he will perform qasar Salaah at his destination when he intends staying there for less than fifteen days. Hence, just as the intention of safar was considered after the kaafir accepted Islam, similarly the intention of a woman who travels the safar distance in the state of haidh should also be considered. Upon reaching her destination, she should also make qasar instead of performing full Salaah as she is also baaligh and mukallaf.

Fourth Proof

The fourth proof the student presented is that from the Hanafi jurists, this view (that the woman will perform qasar when she becomes clean at her destination) was held by Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), who is the most senior Faqih from all the Hanafi Fuqaha who have discussed this maslah. Since he is the most senior in era, his view is the weightiest and should be given preference over the view of the Fuqaha who came later.

In essence, the student tried to explain, from all these abovementioned four proofs, that a woman in the state of haidh remains mukallaf and that her intention of safar when she is in haidh should also be considered. Below we will present a detailed response to these four arguments.

 

A Response to the proofs mentioned

Argument of a Woman in Haidh Travelling and not Fasting During Ramadhaan

As for the argument presented that the intention of a woman who travels in the state of haidh during the month of Ramadhaan is considered and therefore the concession of not fasting also applies to her just as it applies to a baaligh male who travels during the month of Ramadhaan, then this argument is not correct. The reason is that the concession she has received for not fasting is not on account of the safar, but rather on account of the haidh. Even before she commenced the safar, she was commanded to terminate the fast due to the haidh (i.e. on account of the haidh, the fast that she keeps immediately breaks). Hence, her not fasting during safar is not on account of the safar, but is rather on account of the haidh. We thus understand that in her case, the safar is not the مرخص. Furthermore, in order for safar to be regarded as a مرخص, it is necessary that it be possible for one to be able to fast if he wishes or act upon the concession during that time and not fast. As far as the woman in haidh is concerned, even before embarking on the safar, she was totally unable to fast, and during the safar as well, she did not have an option between fasting and not fasting. So for one to say that safar is the مرخص for her not fasting and that she is mukallaf just as a man is mukallaf is totally incorrect. Hence, after becoming clean, the concession of not fasting will also not apply to her, since she is not regarded as a musaafir, but rather a muqeem. The Fuqaha have not mentioned that she will receive the concession of not fasting when she becomes clean after reaching her destination.

Argument of a Woman in Haidh entering into Ihraam

As for the argument of a woman in haidh being able to enter into the state of ihraam and her intention being considered at that time proving that she is mukallaf (despite her being in the state of haidh), then this argument is incorrect. The reason for this argument being incorrect is that being in the state of haidh is not a مانع of ihraam and thus does not prevent her from entering into the state of ihraam and carrying out the a’maal of Hajj and Umrah. Even if she carries out the tawaaf in the state of haidh, the tawaaf will be valid, though she will be sinful and damm will be compulsory. Hence, since she was اهل of carrying out the rituals of Hajj and Umrah in the state of haidh, her intention of ihraam was considered. As for salaah, then haidh is a مانع  from her performing Salaah and ibaadaat that are related to Salaah (e.g. reciting the Qur’an, sajdah tilaawat, etc.). When she does not remain اهل of carrying out Salaah, then her intention to travel (which is the cause for the concession of Salaah) will also not be valid as it relates to the ibaadat of Salaah. It is only from the time that she becomes اهل of performing Salaah that the safar will be calculated. If the distance from that point until her destination was the safar distance or more, she will be a musaafir, and if it was less than the safar distance, she will not be regarded as a musaafir and she will perform full Salaah. Therefore, for one to compare the maslah of ihraam to the maslah of Salaah is incorrect. Allamah Tahtaawi (Rahimahullah) clearly explains that the reason for her not being able to perform Salaah is her not being اهل of performing the Salaah.

طهرت الحائض وبقي لمقصدها يومان تتم في الصحيح كصبي بلغ بخلاف كافر أسلم.
قال الشامي: (قوله تتم في الصحيح) كذا في الظهيرية. قال ط (الطحطاوي) وكأنه لسقوط الصلاة عنها فيما مضى لم يعتبر حكم السفر فيه فلما تأهلت للأداء اعتبر من وقته.  (رد المحتار 2/135)

One should understand that the comparison is not between ihraam and safar. Rather, it is between ihraam and Salaah, because the concession of safar (qasar) relates to Salaah. When haidh has prevented her from Salaah entirely (and she is not regarded as mukallaf at all in this branch of Deen during the time of haidh) then the concession of safar (qasar) does not feature anywhere. It is as though she had never travelled. The proof to show that she is not at all mukallaf of performing Salaah is that there is no qadha of the Salaah missed during haidh, and if she hears the Aayat of sajdah being recited or she herself recites it, then there is no qadha of the sajdah when she becomes clean. From this, it is clear that the concession granted for not performing full Salaah during safar (but rather qasar Salaah) does not apply to her as she is completely absolved of Salaah during haidh.

Clearing a misconception

One should not misunderstand and think that after travelling the entire safar distance in haidh, reaching her destination and becoming clean, she will have to make qadha for the fasts missed during the safar, and making up for the fasts missed during the safar shows that there was safar found from her and that the concession of safar should apply to her. The reason is that making up for the missed fasts is not confined to safar. Rather, even a woman who does not travel and misses fasts due to haidh will have to make up for the missed fasts after becoming clean. Therefore, making up for the missed fasts after becoming clean does not prove that there was any concession found for not fasting due to the safar in the state of haidh. In essence, a woman being able to enter into ihraam during haidh does not in any way prove that her intention to travel in haidh is considered and the laws of a musaafir should apply to her. The basis of these two maslahs is completely different and hence comparing one to the other is incorrect.

Viewing this maslah from a different ang​le

Another proof to show that haidh is not a مانع of ihraam but is a مانع of Salaah entirely (and makes a woman ghair mukallaf of performing Salaah, thereby resulting in the concession of safar which relates to Salaah not applying to her) is comparing a woman in haidh to a person in janaabat in regard to the maslah of ihraam and Salaah. In the state of haidh, a woman is allowed to enter into ihraam and a person in janaabat is also permitted to enter into ihraam (i.e. he is allowed to carry out all the a’maal of Hajj besides entering the musjid to perform tawaaf just as is the law regarding a woman in haidh). In other words, neither haidh nor janaabat are مانع of ihraam and there is a resemblance between both (a woman in haidh and a person in janaabat) in the maslah of ihraam. However, we should understand that there is also a difference between both مانع. The مانع of haidh is of a higher level compared to that of janaabat. In janaabat, a person remains mukallaf of Salaah and has to make qadha later on. If he recites the aayat of sajdah or hears the aayat of sajdah being recited, he will have to make the sajdah after performing ghusal. However, in the case of a woman in haidh, the مانع found makes her ghair mukallaf of Salaah entirely. Therefore, even if she recites the aayat of sajdah or hears the aayat of sajdah being recited, she will not have to make the sajdah after becoming clean because she was not mukallaf when the aayat of sajdah was heard or recited. Hence, though the مانع of janaabat resembles the مانع of haidh in the maslah of ihraam, it differs with it in the maslah of Salaah and it does not make the person ghair mukallaf. Accordingly, the obligation of Salaah still remains upon him. This causes the concession of qasar to apply to him, whereas it does not apply to a woman who travels in the state of haidh.

A principle regarding the Shar’ee conc​ession

As we have explained above in the maslah of not fasting during safar, in order for a concession to be regarded as a concession, it is necessary that it be possible for one to practise on the law (i.e. one must be able to perform Salaah for one to qualify for the concession of qasar). In the state of safar, all four rakaat Salaah become two rakaat Salaah and the sunnat-e-muakkadah Salaah (besides the two rakaats sunnat of fajr) enter into the hukm of nafl, whereas a woman in haidh is unable to perform any Salaah in this state. When she has been absolved entirely of performing Salaah, the concession of Salaah during safar does not apply to her. When the concession of safar does not apply to her, then it is as though she did not travel at all and the laws of a musaafir will not apply to her when she reaches her destination. Hence, at her destination, she will be regarded entirely as a muqeem. If the days of Qurbaani arrive, the concession of not making Qurbaani will not apply to her as she is not a musaafir but a muqeem in all respects. The main concession of safar relates to Salaah and fasting. When neither of these laws apply to a woman who is travelling in the state of haidh, then there is no safar that is found from her and thus the concession does not apply to her. When the concession does not apply to her then it is as though she did not travel at all. The Fuqaha mention that at the time of safar, a woman is  تابعto her husband in regard to the law of safar. Hence, if his niyyat is to travel the distance of safar, then he will become a musaafir and since she is subject to him, she will also become a musaafir despite her not having the intention to travel. However, this maslah only applies in the case where the wife is not in the state of haidh. If she travels in the state of haidh, then this law will not apply to her.

A response to the third argument

As for the maslah of a kaafir who travels the safar distance in the state of kufr, and upon reaching his destination, accepts Islam, then the Shar’ee ruling is that he will make qasar at his destination (in the case where he intends staying for less than fifteen days at his destination).
Before explaining this maslah, it is of paramount importance for us to understand that in the books of Fiqh, the Fuqaha have explained three similar situations and given the ruling for each. It is necessary for us to understand these three masaail and the basis for the ruling in each case.

The first situation is regarding a child who travels the safar distance and after reaching the destination, becomes baaligh. The second situation is regarding a kaafir who travels the safar distance and after reaching the destination, accepts Islam. The third situation is regarding a woman who travels the safar distance in the state of haidh and after reaching the destination, becomes clean.

As for the Shar’ee ruling regarding the child who travels the safar distance and after reaching his destination, becomes baaligh, the Fuqaha explain that he will perform full Salaah at his destination. The reason they give is that the child was not mukallaf (of the laws of Deen) at the time of travelling and only became mukallaf after reaching his destination. Therefore, it will be considered as though he never travelled and he will perform full Salaah at his destination, even if he intends staying for less than fifteen days.

إذا بلغ الصبي يصلي أربعا وإذا أسلم الكافر يصلي ركعتين، وهو اختيار الصدر الشهيد لأن نية السفر من الكافر جائزة لكونه من أهل النية فصار مسافرا من ذلك الوقت،ونية الصبي لم تصح لأنه ليس من أهل النية .(الفتاوى التاتارخانية 2/505)

As for the Shar’ee ruling regarding a kaafir who travels the distance of safar and upon reaching his destination, accepts Islam, the Fuqaha explain that he will perform qasar at his destination. The reason they give is that his niyyat at the time of safar is considered and that he is أهل of performing Salaah on account of being مخاطب. The preferred opinion in regard to whether the kuffaar are مخاطب with only the usool of Shariah or the usool as well as the furoo’ is that they are مخاطب with both. This is the preferred opinion in the Hanafi Mazhab:

مطلب في أن الكفار مخاطبون ندبا (قوله إذ الكفار لا يخاطبون بها عندنا) الذي تحرر في المنار وشرحه لصاحب البحر أنهم مخاطبون بالإيمان، وبالعقوبات سوى حد الشرب، والمعاملات وأما العبادات فقال السمرقنديون: إنهم غير مخاطبين بها أداء واعتقادا قال البخاريون: إنهم غير مخاطبين بها أداء فقط وقال العراقيون إنهم مخاطبون بهما فيعاقبون عليهما وهو المعتمد. (رد المحتر 4/128)

This can also be established from the following Aaayat of the Quraan:

مَا سَلَکَکُمۡ فِیۡ سَقَرَ ﴿۴۲﴾ قَالُوۡا لَمۡ نَکُ مِنَ الۡمُصَلِّیۡنَ ﴿ۙ۴۳﴾ وَ لَمۡ نَکُ نُطۡعِمُ الۡمِسۡکِیۡنَ ﴿ۙ۴۴﴾ وَ کُنَّا نَخُوۡضُ مَعَ الۡخَآئِضِیۡنَ ﴿ۙ۴۵﴾ وَ کُنَّا نُکَذِّبُ بِیَوۡمِ الدِّیۡنِ ﴿ۙ۴۶﴾ حَتّٰۤی اَتٰىنَا الۡیَقِیۡنُ ﴿ؕ۴۷﴾

Hence, when a kaafir is regarded as أهل and mukallaf of performing Salaah and his intention at the time of making safar is also considered, then when he accepts Islam at his destination and the مانع of kufr is removed, the law of Shariah will apply to him, as he had travelled in the state where he was أهل of performing Salaah. It was only the kufr that was preventing him.

صبي ونصراني خرجا إلي مسيرة ثلاثة أيام،فلما سارا يومين،أسلم النصراني،وبلغ الصبي،فإن النصراني يقصر الصلاة في ما بقي من سفره، الصبي يتم، لأن نية النصراني للسفر كانت صحيحة،فصار مسافرا من وقت خروجه،ونية الصبي كانت فاسدة،لأنه ليس من أهل النية.(التجنيس والمزيد لصاحب الهداية 2/161)

ثم الإرادة إنما تكون من الأهل فلو خرج صبي ونصراني قاصدين مسيرة سفر فلما سافرا بعض الطريق بلغ  الصبي وأسلم النصراني والباقي أقل من ثلاثة قصر النصراني دون الصبي بناء على اعتبار نيته في المختار كما في الخلاصة.( النهر الفائق 1/344)

This can be resembled to a baaligh person who travelled the entire journey in janaabat and upon reaching his destination, made ghusal. He will perform qasar at his destination, though he could not perform Salaah during the safar on account of the مانع which is janaabat. However, as he was أهل of performing Salaah and his intention of travelling was considered, he will make qasar at his destination in the case where he intends staying for less than fifteen days.

As far as a woman travelling in the state of haidh is concerned, the Fuqaha resemble her to a child who travels the safar distance and upon reaching his destination, becomes baaligh. The Fuqaha say that the common factor in both is that the child is not at all mukallaf (of the laws of Shariah) due to which his intention is not considered. As for a woman in the state of haidh, though she is mukallaf of the other laws of Shariah, but in regard to Salaah, she is not أهل of performing Salaah. Therefore, when she has been absolved of the obligation of performing Salaah, and the concession of qasar when travelling is dependent upon being أهل of performing Salaah, the concession will not be given to her and she will be regarded as one who did not travel at all. Hence, at her destination, she will perform full Salaah just as a child who becomes baaligh at his destination performs full Salaah.

This maslah of a woman travelling in haidh appears in many of the books of the Hanafi Fuqaha, and the reasoning they have explained for her performing complete Salaah is the same as the law for a child performing full Salaah, as there is a resemblance between both in the law of not being able to perform Salaah. Many Fuqaha only mentioned the situation of the kaafir and the child. However, the علة they have explained in regard to the child is found in the case of the woman. Hence, it could be safely said that they both (i.e. woman and child) will share the same law.

A response to the fourth argument

As for the fourth argument, that this view is the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), who is the most senior Faqih from all the Hanafi Fuqaha who have discussed this maslah, then this argument is not a fiqhi argument. We notice that in many masaail, the Fuqaha give preference to a view, whereas that view opposes the view of another Faqih who was either senior in era or in knowledge compared to the Fuqaha upon whose view the fatwa was passed. In many masaail, we find that the fatwa is passed on Imaam Muhammad’s (Rahimahullah) view, though Imaam Abu Hanifa (Rahimahullah) and Imaam Abu Yusuf (Rahimahullah) were more senior to him in knowledge and era. Therefore, the method of determining the preferred view is to see which view was preferred in the mazhab by the ahl-e-tarjeeh and not which personality was senior in knowledge or era.

Apart from this, if one has to closely examine the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), he will find that he had opposed the view of the majority in two maslahs. The first maslah is the maslah of a woman who travels the safar distance or most of the safar distance in the state of haidh and becomes clean upon reaching her destination, and the second maslah is the maslah of a kaafir who travels the safar distance and accepts Islam upon reaching his destination. In the case of the woman in haidh, he holds the view that she should perform qasar Salaah, and in the case of the kaafir, he holds the view that he should perform full Salaah. In both these maslahs, we see Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah) opposing the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab. If one wants to accept the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah) in the maslah of a woman travelling in haidh, then he should also accept his view in the maslah of a kaafir who travels in the state of kufr. One should either accept both views of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), or leave both views. What is the reason for the difference in accepting one and leaving the other? We do not find any of the Hanafi jurists explaining that the fatwa is upon the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah).

When discussing this maslah in his kitaab, Al-Muheetul Burhaani (pg. 408), the author mentioned both views, the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah) and the view of the majority Fuqaha, but did not quote any tasheeh showing that the fatwa is based upon the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), and neither did he give any indication to show that he had preferred that view. Instead, there is indication found in his kitaab showing that he had preferred the view which conforms to the view of the majority. On page 396, he has explained this maslah in detail together with giving the reasons for the difference between the maslah of the kaafir and the child, and he has also highlighted the view that was preferred by Allaamah Sadrus Shaheed (Rahimahullah), the shaarih of Al-Jaamius Sagheer, who was his respected ustaad and uncle. The preferred view of Allaamah Sadrus Shaheed (Rahimahullah) is the view that the majority Fuqaha of the Hanafi Mazhab have chosen. The details of this can be found below:  

الكافر المسافر إذا أسلم وبينه وبين مقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان حكم المقيم، وكذلك الصبي إذا كان في السفر مع أبيه ثم بلغ الصبي وبينه وبين وطنه أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان مقيماً، هكذا قاله الشيخ الإمام أبو بكر محمد بن الفضل رحمه الله، وقال غيره من المشايخ إذا بلغ الصبي يصلي أربعاً وإذا أسلم الكافر يصلي ركعتين، وهو اختيار الصدر الشهيد رحمه الله تعالى؛ لأن نية السفر من الكافر قد صحت، لكونه من أهل النية، فصار مسافراً من ذلك الوقت ونية الصبي لم تصح، لأنه ليس من أهل النية ومن الموضع الذي بلغ فيه إلى المقصد أقل من مسيرة سفر، فلهذا يصلي أربعاً، وقال بعضهم يصليان ركعتين. وفي «متفرقات» الفقيه أبي جعفر: أنهما يصليان أربعاً (المحيط البرهاني 2/396)

Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah) was among the great Fuqaha of the Hanafi Mazhab and we have the deepest love and respect for him. However, being muqallids of the Hanafi Mazhab, we are bound to follow the preferred view in our Mazhab. Just as we have the greatest love and respect for Imaam Maalik, Imaam Shafi’ee, Imaam Ahmad, Imaam Bukhaari and the other great Imaams and luminaries of Deen, yet we do not follow them in their rulings and instead follow the preferred view of our Mazhab, similarly, in this maslah also, we will not follow the view of Allaamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah) but will rather follow the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab.

Following the preferred view of the Ahl-e-Tarjeeh

After closely examining this maslah, we will find that the view of the majority scholars in the Hanafi Mazhab conforms to the usool of Deen. Apart from this, the reasoning which the Ahl-e-Tarjeeh have explained in the maslah of the child is found in the maslah of a woman travelling in the state of Haidh. Therefore, the law that applies to the child should also apply to the woman as neither of them are أهل of performing Salaah during the safar. This reasoning has been reported from the Ahl-e-Tarjeeh, the likes of Saahib-e-Hidaayah, Allaamah Ibnul Humaam (Rahimahumullah) and others.

Below is the list of some of the Hanafi Fuqaha who have preferred the view that a woman who travels the safar distance in Haidh and becomes clean on reaching her destination will perform full Salaah:

1. The author of Al-Haawi, Allaamah Abu Bakr Al-Haseeri Al-Bukhaari (d. 500) [1] 
2. The author of Fataawa Zaheeriyyah, Allaamah Zaheeruddeen (Rahimahullah) (d. 619) [2]
3. The author of Fataawa Ghiyaasiyyah, Allaamah Dawood bin Yusuf Al-Khateeb (Rahimahullah) (d. 656) [3]
4. The author of Taataarkhaaniyah, Allaamah Fareeduddeen (Rahimahullah) (d. 786) [2]
5. The author of Al-Binaayah, Allaamah Badruddeen Aini  (Rahimahullah) (d. 855) [4]
6. The author of Saghiri, Allaamah Ebrahim Halabi (Rahimahullah) (d. 956) [5]
7. The author of Addurrul Mukhtaar, Allaamah Haskafi (Rahimahullah) (d. 1088) [6]
8. The author of Haashiyatut Tahtaawi Aladdurril Mukhtaar, Allaamah Tahtaawi (Rahimahullah) (d. 1231) [7]
9. The author of Raddul Muhtaar, Allaamah Ibnu Aabideen Shaami (Rahimahullah) (d. 1252) [8]

Below is a list of the Hanafi Fuqaha who have explained the difference in the ruling between the maslah of a child who travels the safar distance and becomes baaligh upon reaching his destination and a kaafir who travels the safar distance and upon reaching his destination, accepts Islam. All these Fuqaha concur that the ruling of both differ, opposed to the ruling of Allamah Abu Ja’far Hinduwaani (Rahimahullah), who says that both the kaafir and child will perform full Salaah. Since the same reason that the Fuqaha have explained for the child is found in the case of a woman who travels the safar distance in the state of haidh, it could be said that according to these Fuqaha as well, the same law will apply to her which applies to the child:

1. The author of Uyoonul Masaail, Imaam Abul Laith As-samarqandi (Rahimahullah) (d. 375) [9]
2. The author of Khulaasatul Fataawa, Allaamah Taahir bin Abdur Rasheed Al-Bukhaari (Rahimahullah) (d. 542) [10]
3. The author of Badaai-us-Sanaai, Allamah Abu Bakr Al-Kaasaani (Rahimahullah) (d. 587) [11]
4. The author of Hidaayah, Allaamah Ali bin Abi Bakr (Rahimahullah) (d. 593) [12]
5. The author of Al-Muheetul Burhaani, Burhaanuddeen Al-Bukhaari (d. 616) [13]
6. The author of Taataarkhaaniyah, Allaamah Fareeduddeen (Rahimahullah) (d. 786) [14]
7. The author of Fataawa Bazzaaziya , Allaamah Muhammad bin Muhammad Al-Bazzaazi (Rahimahullah) (d. 827) [15]
8. The author of Fathul Qadeer, Allaamah Ibnul Humaam (Rahimahullah) (d. 861) [16]
9. The author of Halbatul Mujallee, Allaamah Ibnu Ameer Al-Haajj (Rahimahullah) (d. 879) [17]
10. The author of Ghurarul Hukkaam, Allaamah Mulla Khusroo (Rahimahullah (d. 885) [18]
11. The author of Al-Bahrur Raaiq, Allaamah Ibnu Nujaim (Rahimahullah) (d. 970) [19]
12. The author of An-Nahrul Faaiq, Allaamah Umar bin Ebrahim (Rahimahullah) (d. 1005) [20]
13. The author of Fataawa Qaazi Khaan, Allaamah Hasan bin Mansoor Qaazi Khan (Rahimahullah) (d. 592) [21]
14. Fataawa Hindiyyah [22]

Note: The author of Fataawa Qaazi Khaan, Allaamah Hasan bin Mansoor Qaazi Khan (Rahimahullah) (d. 592), explained the difference in the ruling between the child and the kaafir which conforms to the majority of the Hanafi Fuqaha, though he did not explain the reason for the difference in the ruling.

Below is the list of our Ulama of the recent past who issued fatwa according to the preferred view of the Hanafi mazhab:

1. Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi (Rahimahullah) (d. 1362) [23]
2. Mufti Mahmood Hasan Gangohi (Rahimahullah) (d. 1417) [24]
3. Mufti Rashid Ahmad Ludyaanwi (Rahimahullah) (d. 1422) [25]

An accepted principle according to all four Mazaahib

It is an accepted principle, not only in the Hanafi Mazhab but in all four Mazaahib, that let alone it being impermissible for a muqallid to leave his Mazhab and opt for a ruling in another Mazhab, it is not even permissible for him to randomly choose any view that is found in his own Mazhab (whether he does this after applying his reasoning or not). Rather, he is bound to follow the preferred view that has been explained by the authorities of his Mazhab. In the case where the tasheeh has taken place on two different views and both have been regarded as the مفتى به قول , one has the choice to follow any of the two views, as the authorities of the Mazhab have approved of both views. As far as this maslah is concerned, the tasheeh and fatwa in the Mazhab has been passed upon the view that a woman who travels in the state of haidh and becomes clean upon reaching her destination (or becomes clean during the safar but the distance between the place in which she became clean and her destination is less than the safar distance), she will perform full Salaah. This fatwa has been practised upon for centuries and hence it will not be correct for any muqallid to move away from the view which has been declared as the preferred view in the Mazhab, especially in the case where there is no dire necessity to choose another view in the Mazhab. Allaamah Shaami (Rahimahullah) has mentioned in his kitaab, Rasmul Mufti, that in today’s times, the one following the Mazhab does not have the option of following any view he wishes. Rather, he is bound to follow the view that has been preferred by the Ahl-e-Tarjeeh.

اعلم بأن الواجب اتباع ما     ترجيحه عن أهله قد علما
أو كان ظاهر الرواية ولم       يرجحوا خلاف ذاك فاعلم  (شرح عقود رسم المفتي ص14)

If one has to randomly choose what he feels is correct and move away from the preferred view in this maslah, he will be opening the door for others to do the same in other masaail of Deen.

Allaamah Qaasim bin Qutloobugah (Rahimahullah) (the renowned student of Allaamah Ibnul Humaam (Rahimahullah)) mentions regarding his ustaad, Allaamah Ibnul Humaam (Rahimahullah):

قال العلامة قاسم في حق شيخه خاتمة المحققين الكمال ابن الهمام “لا يعمل بأبحاث شيخنا التي تخالف المذهب” (شرح عقود رسم المفتي ص71)

Despite the rank and greatness of Allaamah Ibnul Humaam (Rahimahullah), his student, Allaamah Qaasim bin Qutloobugah (Rahimahullah), explained that in the situation where his respected ustaad did not follow the ruling of the Hanafi Mazhab and opted for another ruling, he will not be followed.

From the above, we understand that it is not correct for a muqallid to overstep his mark and randomly choose any opinion he wishes from another Mazhab or from his own Mazhab. Rather, he is bound to follow the preferred view in his Mazhab. If he adopts the approach of moving away from the preferred view of his Mazhab and chooses other views, whether with applying his reasoning or not, this will gradually lead to breaking the limits and boundaries of Deen which the Fuqaha have outlined. Hence, in this maslah, the preferred view in the Hanafi Mazhab and the view that was followed for centuries is that a woman who travels the safar distance in haidh and only becomes clean upon reaching her destination (or she travels most of the safar distance in haidh and a little distance which is less than the safar distance out of haidh), she will perform full Salaah upon reaching her destination.

And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

[1] وفي «الحاوي»: سئل عن صبي خرج من نوركارايريد بخارى، فلما بلغ كرمة بلغ، قال: يصلي ركعتين إلى بخارى، وكذلك الكافر إذا أسلم فأما الحائض إذا طهرت من حيضها تصلي أربعاً إلى بخارى.(المحيط البرهاني 2/408 ونحوه في مخطوط الحاوي للإمام محمود بن إبراهيم بن انوش الحصيري البخاري ص35)

[2] وفي الظهيرية: والحائض إذا طهرت من حيضها، وبينها وبين المقصد أقل من مسيرة ثلاثة أيام تصلي أربعا، هو الصحيح (الفتاوى التاتارخانية 2/505)

[3] الكافر المسافر إذا أسلم وبينه وبين مقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام فهو في حكم المقيم يتم صلاته والأشبه أن تكون الحائض مثل الكافر إذا أسلم وهو المختار (ع) صبي ونصراني خرجا إلى السفر فلما سارا يومين أسلم النصراني وبلغ الصبي فالنصراني يقصر والصبي يتم وهو اختيار الصدر الشهيد حسام الدين لأن نية النصراني كانت صحيحة فصار مسافرا من ذلك الوقت ونية الصبي لم تكن صحيحة لأنه ليس من أهل النية.( الفتاوى الغياثية ص 38)

[4] ولو طهرت الحائض في السفر وبينها وبين المقصد أقل من مسيرة سفر تتم هو الصحيح (البناية 3/279)

[5] والحائض إذا طهرت وقد بقي إلى مقصدها أقل من ثلاثة أيام تتم في الصحيح. (غنية المتملي شرح منية المصلي حلبي صغير ص 320)

[6] طهرت الحائض وبقي لمقصدها يومان تتم في الصحيح كصبي بلغ بخلاف كافر أسلم (الدر المختار 2/135)

[7] (قوله تتم في الصحيح) كأنه لسقوط الصلاة عنها فيما مضى لم يعتبر حكم السفر فيه فلما تأهلت للأداء اعتبر من وقته (قوله كصبي بلغ ) أي في أثناء الطريق وقد بقي لمقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام فإنه يتم ولا يتم ولا يعتبر ما مضى لعدم تكليفه فيه (قوله بخلاف كافر أسلم) أي فإنه يقصر فيما بقي وقيل يتم وقد مر الخلاف فيه وفي الصبي والذي يظهر أن مسألة الكافر مبنية على أنه مخاطب بفروع الشريعة وهو الأصح. ( حاشية الطحطاوي على الدر1/338)

[8] طهرت الحائض وبقي لمقصدها يومان تتم في الصحيح كصبي بلغ بخلاف كافر أسلم.

قال الشامي: (قوله تتم في الصحيح) كذا في الظهيرية. قال ط وكأنه لسقوط الصلاة عنها فيما مضى لم يعتبر حكم السفر فيه فلما تأهلت للأداء اعتبر من وقته. (قوله كصبي بلغ) أي في أثناء الطريق وقد بقي لمقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام فإنه يتم ولا يعتبر ما مضى لعدم تكليفه فيه ط (قوله بخلاف كافر أسلم) أي فإنه يقصر. قال في الدرر لأن نيته معتبرة فكان مسافرا من الأول بخلاف الصبي فإنه من هذا الوقت يكون مسافرا، وقيل يتمان، وقيل يقصران. اهـ. والمختار الأول كما في البحر وغيره عن الخلاصة. قال في الشرنبلالية: ولا يخفى أن الحائض لا تنزل عن رتبة الذي أسلم فكان حقها القصر مثله. اهـ. وأجاب في نهج النجاة بأن مانعها سماوي بخلافه اهـ أي وإن كان كل منهما من أهل النية بخلاف الصبي، لكن منعها من الصلاة ما ليس بصنعها فلغت نيتها من الأول، بخلاف الكافر فإنه قادر على إزالة المانع من الابتداء فصحت نيته (رد المحتار 2/135)

[9] ولو أن صبيا ونصرانيا خرجا إلى سفر مسيرة ثلاثة أيام، فلما يومين أسلم النصراني وبلغ الصبي. قال: فإن النصراني يقصر الصلاة فيما بقي من سفره. وأما الصبي فيتم الصلاة،لأن نية النصراني للسفر كانت صحيحة وصار مسافرا من وقت خروجه. وأما الصبي فإن نيته كانت فاسدة، لأن الصبي ليس من أهل النية. (عيون المسائل في فروع الحنفية للإمام أبي الليث نصر بن محمد السمرقندي رحمه الله  المتوفى 375 ص 28 )

[10] وفي الفتاوى صبي ونصراني خرجا إلى سفر مسيرة ثلاثة أيام ولياليها فلما سارا يومين أسلم النصراني وبلغ الصبي فالنصراني يقصر الصلوة فيما بقي من سفره والصبي يتم الصلوة بناء على أن نية الكافر معتبرة هو المختار. والإمام الجليل الفضلي سوى بينهما يعني كلاهما يتمان الصلوة.(خلاصة الفتاوى 1/200)

[11] وذكر في العيون أن الصبي والكافر إذا خرجا إلى السفر فبقي إلى مقصدهما أقل من مدة السفر فأسلم الكافر وبلغ الصبي فإن الصبي يصلي أربعا والكافر الذي أسلم يصلي ركعتين والفرق أن قصد السفر صحيح من الكافر إلا أنه لا يصلي لكفره فإذا أسلم زال المانع  فأما الصبي فقصده السفر لم يصح وحين أدرك لم يبق إلى مقصده مدة السفر فلا يصير مسافرا ابتداء.(بدائع الصنائع 1/279)

[12] صبي ونصراني خرجا إلي مسيرة ثلاثة أيام،فلما سارا يومين،أسلم النصراني،وبلغ الصبي،فإن النصراني يقصر الصلاة في ما بقي من سفره، الصبي يتم، لأن نية النصراني للسفر كانت صحيحة،فصار مسافرا من وقت خروجه،ونية الصبي كانت فاسدة،لأنه ليس من أهل النية.(التجنيس والمزيد لصاحب الهداية 2/161)

[13] الكافر المسافر إذا سلم، وبينه وبين مقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان حكمه حكم المقيم، وكذا الصبي إذا كان في السفر مع أبيه ثم بلغ الصبي وبينه وبين وطنه أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان مقيماً، قاله الشيخ الإمام أبو بكر محمد بن الفضل رحمه الله، وقال غيره من المشايخ: إذا بلغ الصبي يصلي أربعاً وإذا أسلم الكافر يصلي ركعتين، وهو اختيار الصدر الشهيد رضي الله عنه؛ لأن نية السفر من الكافر قد صحت، لكونه من أهل النية، فصار مسافراً من ذلك الوقت ونية الصبي لم تصح، لأنه ليس من أهل النية ومن الموضع الذي بلغ فيه إلى المقصد أقل من مسيرة سفر، فلهذا يصلي أربعاً، وقال بعضهم يصليان ركعتين.(المحيط البرهاني 2/396)

[14] الكافر المسافر إذا أسلم، وبينه وبين مقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان حكمه حكم المقيم وكذلك الصبي إذا كان في السفر مع أبيه ثم بلغ الصبي وبينه وبين وطنه أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان مقيما،هكذا قال الشيخ الإمام أبو بكر محمد بن الفضل وقال غيره من المشايخ: إذا بلغ الصبي يصلي أربعا وإذا أسلم الكافر يصلي ركعتين، وهو اختيار الصدر الشهيد لأن نية السفر من الكافر جائزة لكونه من أهل النية فصار مسافرا من ذلك الوقت،ونية الصبي لم تصح لأنه ليس من أهل النية، ومن الموضع الذي بلغ فيه إلى المقصد أقل من مسيرة سفر فلهذا يصلي أربعا وقال بعضهم يصليان ركعتين.(الفتاوى التاتارخانية 2/505)

[15] صبي ونصراني خرجا إلى مسيرة ثلاث فبلغ الصبي في بعض الطريق وأسلم الكافر قصر الكافر لاعتبار قصده لا الصبي في المختار.(الفتاوى البزازية 1/65)

[16] وعلى اعتبار القصد تفرع في صبي ونصراني خرجا قاصدين مسيرة ثلاثة أيام ففي أثنائها بلغ الصبي وأسلم الكافر يقصر الذي أسلم فيما بقي ويتم الذي بلغ لعدم صحة القصد والنية من الصبي حين أنشأ السفر بخلاف النصراني والباقي بعد صحة النية أقل من ثلاثة أيام.(فتح القدير 2/2)

[17] الأمر الثاني: بيان النية المعتبرة ولها شروط ثلاثة: أحدها: أن يكون من أهلها حتى إن صبيا ونصرانيا لو خرجا إلى السفر الشرعي وسارا يومين ثم بلغ الصبي، وأسلم النصراني،فالصبي يتم، لأنه بنية باطلة، والنصراني الذي أسلم يقصر لصحتها. قال في الخلاصة: هو المختار. والإمام الجليل الفضلي سوى سوى بينهما، يعني كلاهما يتمان الصلاة. وفي الخانية: وقال بعضهم: يصليان ركعتين.(حلبة المجلي وبغية المهتدي في شرح منية المصلي للعلامة ابن أمير الحاج  رخمه الله المتوفى 879 ج1 ص 521)

[18] (سافر كافر وصبي مع أبيه ) أي خرجا قاصدين مسيرة ثلاثة أيام فصاعدا(فأسلم)الكافر(وبلغ)الصبي(وبينهما وبين منزلهما)أي مقصدهما بالسفر (أقل من المدة قالوا(أي عامة المشايخ (المسلم يقصر) فيما بقي من السفر (والصبي يتم) لأن نية الكافر معتبرة فكان مسافرا من الأول بخلاف الصبي فإنه من هذا الوقت يكون مسافرا إذ الفرض أن الباقي ليس بمدة السفر (وقيل يتمان) بناء على عدم العبرة بنية الكافر أيضا (وقيل يقصران) بناء على تبعية الابن للأب المسافر.(درر الحكام في شرح غرر الأحكام للعلامة ملا خسرو 1/136)

[19] وعلى اعتبار القصد تفرع في صبي ونصراني خرجا قاصدين مسيرة ثلاثة أيام ففي أثنائها بلغ الصبي وأسلم الكافر يقصر الذي أسلم فيما بقي ويتم الذي بلغ لعدم صحة القصد والنية من الصبي حين أنشأ السفر بخلاف النصراني والباقي بعد صحة النية أقل من ثلاثة أيام وسيأتي أيضا.(البحر الرائق 2/228)

[20] ثم الإرادة إنما تكون من الأهل،فلو خرج صبي ونصراني قاصدين مسيرة سفر فلما سافرا بعض الطريق بلغ  الصبي وأسلم النصراني والباقي أقل من ثلاثة قصر النصراني دون الصبي بناء على اعتبار نيته في المختار كما في الخلاصة.( النهر الفائق 1/344)

[21] الكافر المسافر إذا أسلم وبينه وبين مقصده أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان حكمه حكم المقيم،وكذا الصبي إذا كان في السفر مع أبيه ثم بلغ الصبي وبينه وبين وطنه أقل من ثلاثة أيام كان مقيما، هكذا قال الشيخ أبو بكر محمد بن الفضل رحمه الله تعالى،وقال غيره من المشايخ إذا بلغ الصبي يصلي أربعا وإذا أسلم الكافر يصلي ركعتين.(فتاوى قاضيخان 1/149)

[22] ويعتبر أن يكون من أهل النية حتى أن صبيا ونصرانيا إذا خرجا إلى السفر وسارا يومين ثم بلغ الصبي وأسلم النصراني فالصبي يتم والمسلم يقصر كذا في الزاهدي (الفتاوى الهندية 1/139)

[23] بہشتی زیور ص129

[24] فتاوى محموديہ 7/502

[25] احسن الفتاوى 4/87

مرخص  means the cause for the concession of not fasting

مانع  means a prevention

اهل means having the ability to carry out the ibaadat.

 

Answered by:

Mufti Zakaria Makada

Checked & Approved:

Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmail
Sidebar