احکامِ سفر اور وطنِ اصلی: کلاسیکی فقہ اور معاصر اجتہادات کا تقابلی و تطبیقی مطالعہ

Rulings of Travel and the Original Homeland: A Comparative and Applied Study of Classical Jurisprudence and Contemporary Ijtihād

Abstract

This article examines the jurisprudential foundations and contemporary applications of Islamic rulings on travel concessions (rukhaṣ al-safar) and permanent domicile (waṭan aṣlī). Classical Islamic law developed these rulings within stable patterns of residence and mobility; however, modern transportation and professional mobility have generated complex legal questions that classical texts do not address directly. The study systematically compares the four major Sunni schools regarding the legal definition of travel and the determination of domicile, with particular focus on the methodological divide between the Ḥanafī school, which grounds the definition of travel in duration, and the majority (jumhūr), which relies on measurable distance. The divergent practices of the Companions at Makkah after the Hijrah are examined as an early juristic precedent for later debates on domicile. Drawing on contemporary scholars including Ibn Bāz, Ibn ʿUthaymīn, and Wahbah al-Zuḥaylī, the article argues that professional travel does not invalidate travel concessions, that multiple permanent domiciles are juristically recognizable, and that marital affiliation alone does not establish permanent domicile without explicit intention of settlement. The study concludes that classical Islamic jurisprudence possesses sufficient methodological flexibility to accommodate modern mobility while preserving its foundational principles.