conflict with the plain sense that first comes to mind, for it would merge literal and figurative meanings—something permissible only when a contextual indicator demands it, and here no such indicator exists. As for the wording cited by the ḥāfiẓ from Aḥmad—“It is not fitting that mounts be readied”—that report is unauthentic, as has been demonstrated repeatedly, and therefore offers no proof.

Even if it were sound, it would not establish bare permissibility; it is, in fact, an explicit text indicating disapproval. Accordingly, al-Nawawī’s statement in his commentary on the Abū Saʿīd narration—“The correct view among our school is that it is neither unlawful nor disliked”—is untenable. Al-Nawawī likewise says in his commentary on the Abū Hurayra version: “According to the majority of scholars, the meaning is that there is no merit in setting out for any mosque other than these.” By conceding that point he admits that travelling to any place besides the three mosques brings no virtue; it is therefore not a righteous deed, nor a devotional act, nor an instance of obedience. Yet it is clearly observed that those who undertake such journeys do so seeking nearness to Allah, and this is, by unanimous agreement, forbidden, for it constitutes worship of Allah through a practice He has not legislated.

Hence the scholars have said: “If someone vows to pray in, to observe retreat in, or to travel to a mosque or shrine other than these three, that vow is not binding by consensus of the imams; whereas if he vows to reach the Sacred Mosque for Hajj or ʿUmra, it becomes obligatory by consensus, and if he vows to visit the Prophet’s Mosque ﷺ or al-Aqṣā for prayer or retreat, then according to Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Aḥmad he must fulfil that vow.”