Posted by Yasir Qadhi July 8th, 2011 Printer-friendly 17 Comments rt 1 Part 2 Part 3 Continued from Part 1 1.

1.5 The Distance in Modern Measurements

Share82Pa

So what exactly does a days journey mean? Not surprisingly, there is no easy method of converting classical measurements into modern ones. It appears that many res earchers (classical and modern) did not pay due attention to scientifically conv erting such measurements into modern ones. What follows is my brief attempt to i llustrate the hurdles that one faces. The standard units of measurement for travel during early Islam were the farsakh and the bard. However, the Prophetic traditions use the term days travel. So the fi rst issue at hand is to convert the Prophetic days travel into the classical terms of farsakh and bard. Before we even begin that, let us first define these terms a nd establish a relationship between them. A bard was a distance that a messenger could travel before he needed to stop to a llow his animal to rest. If the message was urgent, then at the end of every bard there would be a fresh animal waitingfor him. Eventually, the term began to be applied to the messenger himself and then to the actual message, hence modern Arabs still call the postal service bard.[1] A farsakh appears to be a Persian measurement that the Arabs adopted (it was als o adopted by the British and called a league). Most early works mention that four farsakhs make up one bard.[2] So it can be said that each bard is divided into fou r smaller units of a farsakh (plural is farsikh). 1 bard = 4 farsikh So far, so good. Now the real confusion begins. The first real issue is: How many bards can be traversed in a 24-hour period? Unf ortunately, this is not something that is unanimously agreed upon, and it is thi s difference of conversion that results in one difference of opinion over the nu mber of days required to consider someone a traveler.

Collectively, the anbals, Shfs and Mliks all agreed that the distance of travel wa bards. However, they disagreed amongst themselves as to what exactly this meant i n terms of days of travel. Some within these schools said that in any 24-hour peri od, a maximum of two bards could be traversed; other scholars within these same s chools, however, said that four bards could be traversed in one 24-hour period. I t is because of this conversion difference that these three schools of law had o pinions of both one-day and two-days as being the minimal amount of travel. One days travel = EITHER two bards OR four bards [both opinions held] What is important for us to note is that these three schools were in agreement w ith the limit as being four bards. Therefore, for the three schools, Shar distance of travel = 4 bards = 16 farsikh [For the 3 schools] This is the opinion of the schools of law other than the anaf school. As for the an afs, they also disagreed regarding how many farsakhs can be traversed in a day [a

nd there is significant disagreement amongst their own scholars as well]. In order to simplify matters, the majority opinion within the anaf school appears to be that five farsikh can be traveled in a 24-hour period [note that some anaf sc holars said six, some said seven].[3] Thus, for this school:

Shar distance of travel = 3-day journey = 3 days x 5 farsikh/day = 15 farsikh [anaf s hool] Ironically, even though the anafs have a larger quantity in terms of travel days, because the actual journey traveled per day is shorter, the net difference was n ot of great significance. Therefore, in the end, all four schools of law are relatively close to one anoth er in terms of farsikh (16 or 15). The second dilemma that we face is: How exactly does one translate a farsakh int o the modern measurements of miles and kilometers? Obviously, depending on ones e stimate of a farsakh, the distance of a days journey will vary accordingly. Here is where we encounter our first serious problem. We begin by pointing out that many medieval texts define a farsakh as being 3 mls. Ml is, of course, how the Arabs pronounce the word mile. This would be absolutely p erfect, until we understand that this ml is not the equivalent of the modern mile! It appears that the Arabs got this word (as did the Romance languages) from the Roman mllia, which they (i.e., the Romans) measured as a thousand paces by foot. A pace was defined to be a full stride of a Roman soldier (in our understanding, that would be two steps, one with each foot). It has been estimated that this Rom an mile was actually around five-thousand feet (in our current understanding of fe et). It was only centuries later that the English Parliament standardized the exa ct length of miles and feet, and decreed that 1 mile = 5280 feet (around 1.6 km) . [Why and how they came up with number is really beyond the scope of this artic le our readers are already confused by now, and those who are interested may loo k this tidbit up in any encyclopedia]. While the Arabs took the name from the Romans, they did not take the same measur ement. It is also claimed that the Roman soldiers step was considerably larger th an the average step of other ethnicities, especially those who had shorter statu res. The Roman mllia was adopted by many different cultures. Therefore, to distinguish this Arab version of the mile from other adopted versions, it was called the Ha shemite mile. Other versions of the mile were the Russian, the Danish, the Portug uese, and the German (not to mention the Nautical Mile, which is different from land equivalents). Our scholars did attempt to define this Hashemite mile (a.k.a. a ml); however, in the days before scientific measurements and international treaties that govern ed such matters, they could not come up with a unified definition. Some classica l texts mention that a ml consists of twelve-thousand steps; others claimed that a ml was as far as the eye can see; yet others claimed that it was the distance w here one could recognize a figure of a human in the distance but could not tell whether it was a male or female.[4] What is clear from all of this is that not only is a ml undefined, even if one of these definitions were to be taken, it would not be scientifically precise. The bottom line is that the Arab ml, a.k.a. Hashemite mile, had never been scientifica

lly defined. How could it, in an era before the Newtonian scientific revolution that we are all familiar with and upon whose standards we conduct experiments? In the 16th century, the British parliament offered a precise definition that ha s stuck to this day: that 1 mile = 5280 feet (around 1.6 km). Remember that thi s conversion factor was a relatively recent one, offered by the British. However , when some of our modern scholars attempted to then translate these ancient dis tances of farsikh and bard into modern units, they appeared to have read in the Br itish conversion units into the ancient terms. Hence, they simply chugged and plu gged away, using the ancient definition of one farsakh being three medieval Hashe mite mls, and every mile (sic.) being 5280 feet. Thus, they moved from an ancient t erm (farsakh) to a medieval one (ml) to a British definition of another (mile). This was not the only attempt to translate the farsakh into a recognizable unit. The famous scholar Ibn Abd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) stated that a farsakh is roughly 10,500 arm-lengths (dhir).[5] Very well, but what does that mean for us in our units of measurement? An average arm-length has been estimated in our times to be aro und 48 centimeters (i.e., 0.48 meters).[6] It appears that a large group of late r scholars accepted Ibn Abd al-Barrs conversion factor and based modern calculatio ns on it. Other scholars, such as al-Nawaw, al-Raml, and al-ajjw all held the position that a f arsakh is in fact eighteen-thousand dhir.[7] Hence, plugging and chugging away: - With the conversion factor of one farsakh = 3 ml = 3 standard miles Four bards = 16 farsakhs x 3 ml/farsakh = 48 ml = 48 miles = 77.25 km

- With the conversion factor of Ibn Abd al-Barr: Four bards = 16 farsakhs x 10,500 dhir/farsakh x 0.48 meters/dhir = 80.64 km (50.4 m iles)

- With the conversion factor of al-Nawaw: Four bards = 16 farsakhs x 18,000 dhir/ farsakh x 0.48 meters/dhir = 138.24 km (86.4 miles)

For reasons that I could not understand, the modern anafi position typically calc ulates a distance of 15 farsakhs to be 77 km (or 48 miles). It can be seen that the conversion factor of al-Nawaw actually yields almost doub le the distance of the first conversion factor. It can also be seen that all of these conversions are rather tenuous; none of them could have been known or meas ured with such precision during the time of the first generations of Islam. Now that we have successfully (?) translated these ancient units into three poss ible distances (and note that there are even more possibilities if we were to di scuss other conversion factors), let us return to the issue of the distance requ

ired for one to be considered a traveler. 1.6 The strongest opinion Now that we have discussed the actual distance of these measurements, let us ret urn to the original question: which of these opinions appears to be correct? The strongest opinion and Allah knows best appears to be the last one (viz., tha t a traveler is one who customarily understands his situation to be one of travel) , for a number of reasons: 1) Ibn Taymiyyas point that the Prophet did not specify any distance is a very po ignant one. He neither ordered that the earth be measured, nor did most of the t ravelers of the time calculate the distance that they traveled. It does not make sense, therefore, that the Shariah would place a numerical value when such unit -definitions were not known or followed by the majority of that generation.

2) Even in the hadiths that the majority use (about a woman traveling without a maram), there are discrepancies between one-day, two-days and three-days all three ings are reported in one or both of the Sa works. So which one should be resorted t o? Additionally, all three hadiths use the word travel; would it not, therefore, be s afe to assume that the Prophet was not trying to link the word travel to any dista nce, but rather simply discussing the issue of a woman traveling without a maram? Furthermore, the tradition about permitting wiping over the socks has nothing t o do with setting a limit for traveling it merely sets a time-limit for allowing s omeone to wipe over ones socks. Therefore, there is nothing in the hadith literature that one can safely use as a defining distance for travel.

3) As can be clearly seen, there is no precise and agreed upon conversion factor for translating a days journey into a tangible and precise measure. There are a nu mber of grey areas in this calculation. What exactly is a days journey? How many bar s are in such a journey? How many farsakhs can be traveled in a day? How long is a farsakh? What exactly is a ml? And so forth. If this is the case, it does not make sense that our Shariah would have obligate d us to measure travel in units that to this day remain undefined and ambiguous. 4) To place a precise measurement on travel seems to contravene the purpose of the law and hence the maqid of the Shariah. The purpose of this ruling is to ease the burden upon the traveler by allowing him to shorten and join the prayer. If a t raveler is engrossed in figuring out how far he has traveled (imagine in the day s before car odometers gave this information), it is as if the Shariah is placin g a bigger burden on him by asking him to calculate a distance that he is, in al l likelihood, not capable of doing. 5) This distance really makes very little sense in modern times. A distance of 8 0 km is more akin to a picnic than to a travel and according to Ibn Taymiyyas def inition, if one were to go to a park outside of ones city with the express intent ion of returning in a short period of time, this would not constitute travel. If we look at the frame of mind of a family who is going on a day-trip to a park o utside the city versus going on a journey, there is a significant difference. Wh en one goes on a day-trip, the house is left as is, the neighbors are not told, life at home is not assumed to be interrupted, and so forth. On the other hand, wh en one goes on a travel, miscellaneous factors must be taken care of before embark ing on a journey. All of this is known to and experienced by the people of our tim e.

6) Before even beginning to convert such ancient units into modern ones, an even m ore profound dilemma can and should be discussed. For those who follow one of th e standard opinions, the issue must be raised: is it not too literalistic to measu re a days- journey by the means and methods of eras gone by? In other words, if the primary means of travel of the time were horses and camels, and based on that o ne extrapolates a days journey, would it be permissible (in fact, would it not be more in line with the goals of the Shariah) to measure a modern days journey in car-travel time? Personally, if I were to follow this opinion (meaning, if I were to follow a twoday journey opinion), it would make more rational sense to me to measure a days jou rney in the standard travel-means of our times, namely: a car. This then raises a further question: Does this mean we can eventually extrapolate to a passenger p lane? How about a private jet? Questions abound; answers, on the other hand, are not so easy to bring forth. All of this lends further credence to the position of Ibn Taymiyya: that a travel er is one who is customarily considered one. An average Muslim does not need to r esort to a scholar, or to a map, in order to find out if s/he is a traveler or n ot: you know it by what you do to prepare for a trip and your psychological fram e of mind.

To be continued In our next and final installment, we will discuss how long one remains a travel er at a non-resident location. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------[1] There are other opinion on the origin of this word as well. See Lisn al-Arab, 3/86-8. [2] Most because there is also an opinion that two farsakhs make up a bard. [3] Al-Tahnaw, Il al-Sunan 7/282; al-Ayn, Shar al-Hidya 3/4. [4] Lisn al-Arab, 11/639, al-Shawkn, Nayl al-Awr, 3/245. [5] To be more precise, he claimed that each farsakh was three miles, and each mile was three-thousand five-hundred arm-lengths; hence each farsakh would be 3 X 3,5 00 = 10,500 arm-lengths. [6] Najm al-Din al-Kurdi, al-Maqadir al-Shariyya, p. 258. [7] To be more pedantic, they claimed that a ml is six-thousand arm-lengths, and a farsakh is three mls, hence a farsakh would be 18 thousand arm-length. See: al-ajjw, al-Iqn, 1/274; al-Shawkn, Nayl al-Awr, 3/245. Tagged as: Fiqh, prayer, safar, salah, travel, Yasir Qadhi . MuslimMatters.org by Yasir Qadhi on July 8th, 2011. All rights reserved. Please see legal & other di sclaimers here. 17 Responses Abu "i wish i had a kunya"

July 8, 2011 1:04 AM .MashAllah, enlightening article. I wish Sheikh Yasir would write more articles related to islamic sciences (like this one) and less about politically charged issues. We like the old sh. Yasir Reply Zeyad July 8, 2011 10:24 AM .I agree! I love articles that blend Islam, sciences, and world history! More please! Jazak Allah khair! Reply Amy July 8, 2011 4:15 AM .Salaam The first time I heard the opinion about travel being defined as what a persons considers travel to be made so much sense to me, while until then I had been baf fled by seemingly arbitrary and obscure definitions. I think there is a flaw in the logic that a complex question (What is travel?) with many inherent variables ( by what means, at what speed, through what terrain, etc) can be reduced to a sin gle magic number. Im not sure if it was your goal to demonstrate the futility of re lying on archaic measures and conversion factors, but I think you succeeded. And I think your answerthe position of Ibn Taymiyyais the only one that can withst and the scrutiny of time, as should the religion of truth. Reply sakib July 8, 2011 5:16 AM .Abu, whats wrong with politically charged issues? Is politi cs not part of Islam? Reply Amad July 9, 2011 5:35 PM .exactly. Those are the issues that affect us as much as re ligious issues. May Allah put barakah in Shaykh Yasirs works in all affairs that he provides guidance on politics and religion. Reply Umar July 9, 2011 9:58 PM .Ameen.

Dont you feel that his religious articles are a lot more comprehensive though? as o pposed to current affairs articles with a religious perspective. Salam Reply Abu "i wish i had a kunya" July 10, 2011 10:27 PM .Sorry bro wish I could answer but moderator not letting my posts go through. Thanks. Reply Leo Imanov July 8, 2011 6:57 AM .bismi-lLaah wa-lhamdu li-lLaah wa-shshalatu wa-ssalamu alaa rasuli-lLaah wa alaa alihi wa man walah assalaamu alaikum wa rahmatu-lLaahi wa barakaatuH masya Allaah what an article syaikh yasir qadhi has written, an enlightening one ! wa bi-lLaahi-ttaufiq wa-lhidayah wa-ssalamu alaikum Reply Zakir July 8, 2011 12:49 PM .Interesting article but at the same time confusing. I fou nd Islam to be very logical and practical.It make individuals accountable for th eir own actions depending on each persons ability. Why cant we see travelling as a choice made by the person .If he or she has the means to pray during the journey pray and if not adopt the concessions offered b y Allah with best intentions. Most places now have facilities for prayer even while travelling and if we dont h ave it we can even sit and pray. I have been asking many scholars to guide me to understand this , this article s heds a good light but still confusing.Hope the author will give us final easy to understand and practical conclusion for all of us to follow in the next part. Jzk Reply Shuaib Mansoori July 9, 2011 6:59 AM .An insightful series indeed. JazakAllah Khair! May Allah p lace success in this years IlmSummit. Awaiting your reply to my last email

Reply Teena July 9, 2011 6:21 PM .Assalamu Alaikom! I found this article very beneficial alh amdulilah! This is something that I had been concerned about for a while now bec ause I just got a new job in Clear Lake (though I live in Katy) and because Ill b e working on 12 hour shifts for three or four days a week, the only way that I c an make this work is to stay in Clear Lake at a hotel for the three days in whic h Im working back-to-back shifts. I would consider myself to be a traveler: Ill pa ck baggage, stay at a hotel, eating outside (i.e. not being able to cook for mys elf), etc. It would definitely make things easier for me to be able to combine a nd shorten the prayers. Jazak Allahu Khair. Reply MangoLassi July 10, 2011 12:48 PM .JazakAllahu khayran ya shaykh! Couple of points: I grew up in the middle east and some of my dads colleagues at w ork used to shorten their dhuhr and asr because they claimed that they lived in the suburbs and their commute distance was long! How absurd! I remember some of our family friends also shortenining and combining their prayers when they used to go to the mall in the evening cause they claimed it was far away and that the prophet (pbuh) did the same when he went shorter distances. You have shown that this interpretation is not sound cause going to work and going to the mall in t he city does not constitute travelling My question is that sometimes when were fling international and are about to leav e for the airport, I usually shortern and combine dhuhr and asr EVEN though Im at home but theoritically in travel mode cause my bags are packed and am ready to le ave for the airport. Is this fine? Then I usually pray combine maghrib and isha in the plane. Or should I pray dhuhr and asr while at the airport? Reply talwar July 11, 2011 12:51 AM .Two separate issues here: Shortening salah is related to travelling. Combining (jam) is related to difficulty. Since you are at the airport and within your city, do not shorten the salah. If you are going to face difficulty in doing your salah whilst travelling, then com bine the relevant prayers at the airport. Short answer, combine if you have to but dont shorten at the airport, wallahu ala m. Reply saalik

July 11, 2011 9:23 AM .A distance of 80 km is more akin to a picnic than to a tra vel Interesting to note that a < 80km trip, albeit short, can be considered travelli ng to a specific individual. Even to those who follow Ibnu Taymiyyah s opinion. In fact, the real issue is what is customarily considered travel. Because some one may claim driving 350+km s (a round-trip/day trip) is not travel. Whereas so meone may see it as travel. It boils down to that even those of us who agree with this opinion still need to understand what is customarily defined as travel because it differs among the p eople. Lastly, the shaykh himself (Ibn Uthaymeen) gave some nice advice in following th is opinion: The statement of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah is closer to whats correct. Even when theres a difference in what people customarily consider traveling, theres still no problem if the person acts according to the specified distance opinion because some of the Imaams and schol ars sincerely striving towards a correct verdict have said it. So, theres no problem, if Allaah wills. As long as the issue is left undefined, then acting in accordance to what is normally consi dered travel is the correct opinion. http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/books/article_18007.shtml Reply Mohammed Khan July 11, 2011 12:48 PM .Considering that taking Ibn Taymiyyahs opinion will make things extremely hard for everybody and will leave the masses utterly confused, Ill just stick to the opinion of the Madhab I follow. Jazakumullah for spending all the time to compile this though. Reply anonymous July 11, 2011 4:28 PM .I wish more people would take Sh. Yasirs (hafidullah) exam ple and branch out and cover both. The Ummah is in need of leadership while also being in need of understanding the other classical issues of Islam. Reply Asma July 12, 2011 11:05 PM .Assalamu alaikum wa rahmtuallah, JazakAllah khair for the clarification of this topic. Question:

- How do define a journey? I mean if ibn Taymiyyahs opinion were to be considered , how would the following situation be regarded: A person sleeping over at anoth er persons house, and thus brings forth with them luggage (e.g., change of clothe s, toothbrush, etc). The distance between both houses would be no more than a ha lf hour drive. (I guess you use your better judgment in such a case?) p.s., you cant bring up the topic of travelling without going into detail about t he topic of travelling without a mahram for a female It would be ideal if you c an also shed some light into the differences of opinion about that, considering the need for clarification and understanding in this day and age where travellin g for women has almost become a necessity