for prayer. If someone vows to visit the Prophet’s city, he should fulfil his vow if his intention is to pray in the mosque. But if he intends something else, such as visiting those buried in al-Baqī‘ or the martyrs of Uhud, he should not fulfil his vow, because such travel is prescribed only to the three mosques. I know of no leading Muslim scholar who has contradicted this position stated by Mālik and others; rather, their statements indicate agreement with it.

The followers of al-Shāfi‘ī and Ahmad have mentioned two opinions concerning travel to visit graves: prohibition and permissibility. Their early scholars and leading authorities held that it is prohibited, as did the followers of Mālik and others. The disagreement arose only among later scholars, because the Prophet’s words—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—

“No journey should be undertaken except to three mosques”

are declarative in form but convey a prohibition, making such travel unlawful.

Some of them said: “This is not a prohibition. It means only that such travel is not prescribed: it is neither obligatory nor recommended, but permissible, like travelling for trade or other purposes.”

The response to this is: Those journeys are not undertaken as worship, but for a permissible worldly benefit, whereas travel to graves is undertaken as worship. Worship, however, can only consist of what is obligatory or recommended. Since there is agreement that travel to graves is neither obligatory nor recommended, anyone who undertakes it as an act of worship is introducing an innovation and contravening scholarly consensus. Worshipping through an innovation is not permissible. However, someone who does not know that this is an innovation may be excused. Once the Sunnah has been explained to him, he may no longer oppose the Prophet