This shows that Ibn Masʿūd did not define travel by a long distance. Rather, he considered another factor, such as administrative districts. This is not determined by distance or time, but by the breadth or narrowness of administrative jurisdictions. For example, someone in Damascus would be a traveller upon journeying beyond its administrative districts.

Those who held these views appear to have considered that concessions were granted to travellers only because of the hardship they experience on a journey and their need for such concessions. They knew that someone moving from place to place within a single city is not a traveller. The same applies to someone going out to the surrounding area, just as the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would go to Qubāʾ every Saturday, riding or walking, without shortening his prayers. Likewise, the Muslims used to come regularly from al-ʿAwālī for the Friday prayer without shortening their prayers. In their view, someone moving about within a single administrative district had the same status.

Against them, however, one may cite the people of Mecca shortening their prayers with the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, at ʿArafah, Muzdalifah and Minā, although these places belong to Mecca and are affiliated with it. Indeed, they are more closely attached to Mecca than al-Sawād is to Kufa, and nearer to it than al-Sawād is to Kufa. For between the Gate of Banū Shaybah and the imam’s station at ʿArafah, beside the rocks at the foot of the Mount of Mercy… He means this distance and this journey, and they are travellers.

If it is said, “The place to which they travel is not a place where people reside,” the response is: “On the contrary, the village of Namirah was there, though the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not stay in it. There were markets there, and nearby was ʿUranah, whose valley connects with ʿArafah.” Moreover, there is no difference between travelling