are all the more deserving of prohibition.

The same applies to someone who understands the hadith to mean: “Travel is recommended only to the three mosques.” If he understands it to mean that travel is obligatory only to the three, intending obligation arising from a vow—as a group of scholars have stated—then such people say: “Travel to anywhere other than the three is neither recommended nor made obligatory by a vow.” Those who understand the hadith as denying either recommendation or obligation arising from a vow are saying the same thing in substance. If travel becomes obligatory by a vow only to these three, then travel to the other two mosques becomes obligatory by a vow, although it is not otherwise obligatory under the Sharia. It follows that it becomes obligatory because it is recommended under the Sharia. If, among journeys not otherwise obligatory under the Sharia, only journeys to these two become obligatory by a vow, it follows that only journeys to these two are recommended. This has been discussed at length elsewhere.

The other possibility is to say that the implied wording is: “Do not travel to any spot or place other than the three mosques.” Alternatively, the meaning is that travel to any place other than the three is not recommended. This is what everyone means who says: “Travel to anywhere other than the three does not become obligatory by a vow.” That is, do not travel for the sake of that particular place or spot, such that both the purpose and the worship are tied to that very spot, as with travel to the three mosques. This differs from travel to the frontier regions, where the purpose is to travel to a place of frontier duty. The “frontier” may be in one place; then the Muslims conquer the territory adjoining them, and it shifts