本章分为两节。第一节讲缩短礼拜，第二节讲合并礼拜。

In this chapter there are two sections. The first section is about curtailing the prayer and the second is about combining prayers.

旅行在缩短（四拉卡特的）礼拜方面是有效的，这一点已达成共识；在合并礼拜方面也有效，但存在分歧。

Travelling is effective in curtailing (quadruple)141 prayers, by agreement, and is effective in combining prayers, with disagreement.

学者们一致认为可以缩短礼拜，唯有一种偏离的观点除外，即阿伊莎的观点。她主张除了处于恐惧中的人之外，缩短礼拜是不被允许的，其依据是至高者的话：“你们在大地上旅行的时候，如果恐怕不信道者加害你们，那么你们缩短拜功，是无罪的。不信道者确是你们的明显的仇敌。”她们说，先知（愿主赐他恩惠和平安）缩短礼拜，是因为他当时处于恐惧之中。

The jurists agreed about the curtailment of prayers, except for a deviant opinion, which is the opinion of cA5isha, who maintained that curtailing prayers is not permitted, except for one in a state of fear, because of the words of the Exalted, “And when ye go forth in the land, it is no sin for you to curtail [your] worship if ye fear that those who disbelieve may attack you. In truth the disbelievers are an open enemy to you”.142 They isaid that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) shortened his prayers for he was in a state of fear.

他们（大多数学者）在以下五个问题上存在分歧。第一，关于缩短礼拜的裁定（hukm）。第二，适用缩短礼拜的行程长度。第三，可以使人缩短礼拜的旅行种类。第四，旅行者从何处开始缩短礼拜。第五，旅行者若在某地停留，可以继续缩短礼拜的时间期限。

They (the majority) differed over this on five points. First, about the hukm of curtailing prayers. Second, about the length of the journey to which curtailment applies. Third, the kind of journey that justifies curtailment. Fourth, the point from which the traveller may commence shortened prayers. Fifth, the duration in time for which it is permissible for the traveller to continue curtailing prayers, if he has stayed on at one place.

关于缩短拜功（qasr）的裁决，学者们持有四种不同的观点。有人认为，缩短拜功对旅行者而言是一种义务，且已被确定为他的职责。有人认为，缩短与完成对他而言都是义务，可以任选其一，如同赎罪（kaffara）中的选择。有人认为，缩短拜功是逊奈（sunna），而另一些人则认为这是一种许可（rukhsa），完整礼拜更具美德。 第一种观点为艾布·哈尼法及其门徒以及库法学者整体所持，即这是一项确定的义务。第二种观点为沙斐仪的部分门徒所持。第三种观点，即认为是逊奈，为马立克在其所闻名的传述中所持。第四种观点，即认为是许可，为沙斐仪在其最为人知的传述中所持，其门徒也支持此说。

With respect to the hukm of curtailing prayers, they held four different opinions. Some of them held that curtailing prayers is an obligation for the traveller and is determined for him. Some held that curtailing and completion are both obligatory for him by way of an option, like the option in case of expiation (kaffara). Some held that curtailing of prayers is a sunnay while others were of the view that it is an exemption and offering complete prayers has greater merit. The first opinion was held by Abu Harnfa, his disciples, and the Kaffs as a whole, that is, it is a fixed obligation. The second opinion was held by some of the disciples of al-ShaficT. The third, that it is sunna, was held by Malik in the best known narration from him. The fourth, that it is an exemption, was held by al-Shaf?! in the best known narration from him and it is supported by his disciples.

他们产生分歧的原因，在于理性推论与传述证据中命令的措辞形式之间存在冲突，也在于源自实践行为的证据与理性推论及传述证据中用词形式之间存在冲突。旅行者缩短拜功所包含的理性意义，是因为存在艰难而获得的许可，正如他在斋戒等事务上同样获得许可一样。这一点也得到了雅法拉·本·乌麦耶圣训的支持。他说：“我对欧麦尔说：安拉说‘如果你们担心不信道者会袭击你们’，而如今已无此担忧。”他说：“我也曾对此感到疑惑，就此问过安拉的使者ﷺ，他答道：‘这是安拉赐予你们的施舍，你们就接受祂的施舍吧。’”这表明这是一种许可。此外，还有阿布·古拉巴转述的一位来自阿米尔部族之人的圣训：此人来到先知ﷺ那里，先知ﷺ对他说：“安拉免除了旅行者的斋戒义务，也免除了部分拜功。”这两段圣训都见于《沙希赫》辑录之中。所有这些都表明宽容、许可和解除艰难，而不是说缩短拜功是义务或逊奈。

The reason for their disagreement derives from the conflict between rational argument and the form of the command in the transmitted evidence, and also the conflict of the evidence from the acts with the rational argument and the form of the words used in the transmitted evidence. The (rational) meaning arising from the curtailing of prayers for a traveller is an exemption because of the existence of hardship, just as he has been exempted in the case of fasting and other things. This also is supported by the tradition of Yafla ibn Umayya, who said, “I said to TJmar that Allah has said ‘if ye fear that those who disbelieve may attack you’, intending thereby the curtailing of prayers during a He said, ‘I was also struck by what has struck you, so I asked the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), and he replied, qt is a charity that Allah has granted to you, so accept the charity’”. This indicates an exemption. Further, there is the tradition of Abu Qalaba from a man from Banu Amir, who came c to the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said to him, “Allah has lifted from the traveller the obligation for fasting and a part of prayer”. These two traditions are found in the Sahih compilations. All this indicates leniency, exemption, and the removal of hardship, and not that curtailing of prayer is obligatory or a sunna.

该传述中与理性含义以及上述传述相矛盾、就其措辞而言的那段传述，是A'isha（阿伊莎）的传述，其真实性经一致公认。她说："拜功最初是两拜两拜地规定的。旅行中的拜功保留了这一基本形式，而定居时的拜功则增加了。" 与理性含义以及上述传述的含义相矛盾的、源自功修（行为）的证据，是有关先知（愿主的赐福与平安降于他）在一切旅途中都缩短拜功的记载。而且从未有可靠的证据证明先知在旅途中做过完整的拜功。那些主张此为逊奈（sunna）或带选择权的义务（wajib mukhayyar）的人，之所以如此解释，是因为对他们而言，"先知（愿主的赐福与平安降于他）完成了拜功，或做过类似之事"这一点并未得到可靠证明。由此可知，它属于几种类型之一，即：要么是带选择权的义务，要么是逊奈，要么是旅人的确定义务。然而，将其视为确定的义务，与理性含义相矛盾；将其视为免除，则与传述的文字相矛盾。因此，必须将其定为带选择权的义务，或逊奈。这是对各项证据的一种调和。他们还对A'isha的传述提出异议，因为众所周知，她曾做完整的拜功。<Ata? 她说："先知（愿真主的赞颂与平安降临于他）在旅途中会完成礼拜，也会缩短礼拜；他有时斋戒，有时停止斋戒；他会推迟晌礼，提前晡礼；他会推迟昏礼，并提前……" 这一传述也与阿奈斯以及阿布·纳吉赫·麦基的传述相悖。后者说："穆罕默德（愿真主的赞颂与平安降临于他）的同伴们结伴同行，其中一些人完整地礼拜，另一些人则缩短礼拜；有些人斋戒，而另一些人不斋戒。他们互不指责，也未因奥斯曼和阿伊莎完整礼拜而产生分歧。"由此可见，这是他们在第一个问题上的分歧。 在第二个问题上，即允许缩短礼拜的旅程长度，法学家们分歧很大。马立克、沙斐仪、艾哈迈德以及大批法学家认为，行走四个巴里德（即以中等速度一天所走的距离）时即应缩短礼拜。艾布·哈尼法及其弟子和库法学者则认为，缩短礼拜的最低旅程是三天，并且缩短礼拜适用于从一个地区前往另一个地区的人。included 则主张，无论前往近处还是远方，任何旅行都可以缩短礼拜。 他们产生分歧的原因，在于理性含义与经文字面之间的冲突。从理性上讲，旅行之所以可以缩短礼拜，是基于旅途中所存在的艰难，正如旅行中斋戒的情况一样。若如此，则只要存在艰难，缩短礼拜便是允许的。而那些只拘泥于经文字面的人则认为，先知（愿真主的赞颂与平安降临于他）曾说："真主免除了旅行者的斋戒，也免除了其礼拜的一部分。" 因此,凡是可以被称为旅行者的人,都被允许缩短或推迟斋戒。他们以穆斯林圣训集所记载的一段圣训为依据,该段圣训出自欧麦尔·本·哈塔卜:“先知ﷺ在大约十七英里的旅途中会缩短拜功。”

The tradition that contradicts, through the form of its words, the rational meaning and these traditions is the tradition of S&isha, declared authentic by agreement, in which she said, “Prayer has been made obligatory two rak^as at a time. The prayer during journey is this basic (unit), while the prayer within a settlement was increased”. The evidence arising from the acts (of the Prophet) that conflicts with the rational meaning and with the meaning of the above transmitted traditions is what has been reported about the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he shortened his prayer in all his journeys, and it has never been proved authentically that the Prophet had ever offered the complete prayer during a journey. Those who maintained that it is a sunna or an obligation with an option {wajib mukhayyar), interpreted it to be so, for it did not prove to be authentic for them “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) completed his prayer, or did what was similar”. It therefore follows that it is one of several types, that is, either it is an obligation with an option or it is a sunna or it is a determined obligation for the traveller. Its being a fixed obligation, however, conflicts with the rational meaning, while its being an exemption conflicts with the transmitted words. Thus, it is necessary that it be (either) an obligation with an option, or a sunna. This is a kind of reconciliation (of the evidences). They objected to the tradition of ‘A’isha for it is well-known of her that she used to offer the complete prayer. <Ata? has related from her that she said, “The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to complete the prayer during a journey and he used to shorten it, he used to fast and give up fasting, he used to delay the zuhr prayer and hasten the middle prayer, and he used to delay maghrib and" hasten <ishdP\ It is also opposed by the tradition of Anas and of Abu Najlh al-MakkT, who said “that the Companions of Muhammad (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to travel together, with some of them offering the full prayer and others curtailing it, with some of them fasting when others were not. They did not find fault with each other nor did they disagree about the offering of full prayer by TJthman and ‘Alisha”. This, then, is their disagreement on the first point.In their disagreement on the second point, which concerns the length of the journey permitting curtailment of prayers, the Jurists disagreed widely. Malik al-ShafW, Ahmad, and a large group of jurists held that prayer is to be shortened during (a journey of) four barids, which is a distance covered in one day moving at a medium pace. Abu Hamfa, his disciples, and the Kufts said that the minimum for which prayer is to be shortened is a journey of three days, and curtailing is for a person who travels from one region to another. The Zahirites said that curtailing prayers is permitted for each journey, whether to a near or distant place. f The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of the rational meaning with the words. Rationally speaking, the reason why travelling may occasion the curtailment of prayer is based on the hardship that exists, as in the case of fasting during travel. If this is the case, then, then curtailing is permissible whenever hardship is found. Those who take into account only the letter of the law maintain that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Allah has removed from the (liability of) traveller fasting and a part of prayer”. Thus, anyone to whom the term traveller can be applied is permitted to curtail or to forgo (delay) fasting. They supported this with what has been recorded by Muslim from TJmar ibn al-Khattab “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to curtail prayers during a journey of about seventeen miles”.

一群法学家,正如我们前面所说,采纳了第五种观点,认为除非身处危险之中,否则不允许缩短拜功。其依据是至高者的话:"当你们在大地上旅行时,如果你们恐怕不信道者袭击你们,那么你们缩短拜功,是无罪的。不信道者确是你们的明显的仇敌。"143 据说这也是阿伊莎的观点*。他们还认为,先知(愿主的赞颂与祝福降于他ﷺ)曾在恐惧之中缩短自己的拜功。

A group of jurists, as we have said, adopted the fifth opinion maintaining that curtailing of prayers is not permitted, except to the person in a state of fear, because of the words of the Exalted, “And when ye go forth in the land, it is no sin for you to curtail (your) worship if ye fear that those who disbelieve may attack you. In truth the disbelievers are an open enemy to you”.143 It is said that this was cAHsha’s opinion* They also maintained that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to curtail his prayers as he was in a state of fear.

那些考虑到困难因素者的分歧，源于圣门弟子在此问题上的分歧。因此，关于四个巴里德（barid）的说法，传自伊本·欧麦尔（Ibn Umar）和伊本·阿拔斯（Ibn Abbas），并由马立克（Malik）转述。关于三天的说法，则传自伊本·麦斯欧德（Ibn Mas'ud）、奥斯曼（Uthman）等人。

The basis for the disagreement of those who took into consideration the element of hardship stems from the disagreement of the Companions over this. Thus, the opinion about four barids is related from Ibn TJmar and Ibn c Abbas, and has been reported by Malik. The opinion about three days is related from Ibn Mas ud, TJthman, and others.

关于第三点，即允许缩短拜功的旅行种类，一些法学家认为，为求接近真主而进行的旅行，如朝觐、副朝（ʿUmra）和圣战（jihad），都是允许缩短的。

c With respect to the third point that relates to the kind of journey for which curtailment is permissible, some of the jurists said that it is permitted in a journey undertaken to seek nearness to Allah, like hajj, ^umra, and jihad.

• 持这一观点的学者包括艾哈迈德。他们中有人允许在一切合法（mubdh）的旅途中这样做，因此排除了为作恶之目的而进行的旅行。这是马立克和沙斐仪的观点。有些人……

• Those who upheld this opinion include Ahmad. Some of them permitted it in all permissible (mubdh) journeys, thus, excluding journeys undertaken for ev design. This was the opinion of Malik and al-Shafi T. Some of c 189

他们允许在任何一种旅途中这样做，无论是为了寻求亲近（真主），还是出于合法的目的，或是为了作恶的意图。这是艾布·哈尼法及其门徒、又名塞伍尔的阿布·塞伍尔（al-Thawrī）和阿布·塞伍尔（Abu Thawr）的观点。

them allowed it in any kind of journey whether for seeking nearness, permissible, or for evil design. This was the opinion of Abu HanTfa, his disciples, al-ThawrT, and Abu Thawr.

他们分歧的原因，源于理性含义或字面含义与来自圣行（先知的行为）的证据之间的冲突。那些考虑到艰难因素或“旅行”一词字面含义的人，没有区分不同类型的旅行。那些考虑到圣行证据的人则认为，除非是为寻求接近安拉而进行的旅行，否则不允许缩短拜功，因为先知ﷺ从未缩短过拜功，除非是在为寻求接近安拉而进行的旅行中。那些区分合法旅行与怀有非法意图的旅行的人，是通过加强对该原则的应用而做出区分的。该原则涉及在追求非法事物时是否允许豁免。在这一问题上，理性含义与字面含义相冲突，因此法学家们对此产生了分歧。

The reason for their disagreement springs from the conflict of the rational meaning, or the apparent meaning, with the evidence arising from the acts (of the Prophet). Those who took into account the element of hardship or the apparent meaning of the term “journey” did not differentiate between one kind o f journey or another. Those who took into account the evidence arising from the acts said that it is not permitted, except in a journey undertaken to seek nearness to Allah, as the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) did not ever curtail prayers, except during a journey undertaken to seek nearness to Allah. Those who distinguished between a permissible journey and one undertaken with unlawful design in mind did so through an enhanced application of the rule. The rule pertains to whether exemptions are permitted in the pursuit of unlawful things. In this issue the rational meaning is in conflict with the apparent meaning, therefore the jurists differed over it.

关于第四点，即旅行者从何处开始缩短拜功的问题：马立克在《穆宦塔》（al-Muwatta）中说，只有当人离开村庄郊外的居住区域后才可以缩短拜功，并且直到他抵达第一处此类住所时，才开始完整地礼拜。另据传述，他还有一种说法：对于人口稠密的村庄，旅行者须离开该村三英里之外才可缩短拜功；据他的一则传述，这一距离也是城外居民须参加主麻拜的范围。第一种观点为大多数学者所采纳。

On the fourth point that relates to the question of from which spot may the traveller commence to curtail prayers, Malik stated in al-Muwatta* that prayers are not to be curtailed until the person has left the dwellings area on the outskirts of the village and he does not begin to offer full prayers till he reaches the first of such dwellings. It is also related from him that the person is not to curtail prayers in case of the well-populated village until he is at a distance of three miles from it and this, according to him in one narration, is the boundary for the area in which Friday prayers are obligatory on the persons living outside the centre of the town. The first opinion was adopted by the majority.

这一分歧的原因在于词义与由行为所得出的证据之间的冲突。因为“旅行者”一词从一个人开始出行的那一刻起便适用于他。考虑词义的人说，一旦他走出村庄的房屋之外，就应当缩短拜功。考虑行为证据的人，即考虑先知ﷺ的行为的人，说他不应开始缩短拜功，直到他距离村庄的房屋三英里为止，因为这一点是根据阿奈斯的传述确立的，他说：“安拉的使者ﷺ在行程达到三英里或三法尔萨赫时，便礼两拜拜（两拉克尔）——舒尔巴对（其中哪一个）有所怀疑。”

The reason for this disagreement stems from the conflict between the meaning of the term and the evidence arising from the acts. This is so as the word “traveller” is applied to a person the moment he commences his journey. Those who took into account the connotation of the term said that as soon as he goes beyond the houses of the village he is to curtail prayers. Those who took into account the evidence of acts, that is, the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), said that he is not to begin curtailing prayers, until he is at a distance of three miles from the houses of the village as this is established from the tradition of Anas, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to pray two rak^as when he had travelled a distance of three miles or three farasikh—Shu'ba doubted (which)”.

在旅途中途经某城镇时，旅人可以在该地停留多长时间仍然缩短礼拜，学者们对此存在诸多分歧。艾布·欧麦尔曾记述了大约十一种观点，但广为人知的，是各地法学家所持的观点，他们有三种不同的看法。 第一种是马立克和沙斐仪的观点：如果旅人决定停留四天，就应当完整地礼拜。 第二种是艾布·哈尼法和苏富扬·萨瓦里的观点：如果旅人决定停留十五天，就应当完整地礼拜。 第三种是艾哈迈德和达乌德的观点：如果旅人决定停留超过四天，就应当完整地礼拜。

In their disagreement over the time period for which a traveller may stop in a town (during his journey) and yet curtail his prayers there are many disputes; Abu <Umar has related about eleven opinions, but the well-known ones are those that are held by the jurists of the provinces, and they have three different opinions. First is the opinion of Malik and al-ShaficT that if the traveller decides to stay for four days he is to offer complete prayers. The second is the opinion of Abu Hanifa and Sufyan al-Thawri that if he decides to stay for a period of fifteen days he is to offer complete prayers. The third is the opini0n of Ahmad and Dawud that if he decides to stay for more than four days he is to offer complete prayers.

分歧产生的原因在于该问题在法律中没有明确规定，而用类比来确立此类规定，被所有人视为薄弱的做法。因此，他们都努力依据所传述的情形来论证自己的观点，即先知（愿真主的赞颂与平安降临于他ﷺ）在途中停留时仍然缩短礼拜，或者仍然对礼拜按照旅行者的律例处理。

The reason for disagreement arises from the fact that the matter is not expressly stated in the law, and using analogy for such prescription is deemed weak by all. All of them therefore strived to argue for their opinion on the basis of the reported circumstances in which the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) continued to curtail prayers while he stopped on the way or he continued to treat prayers with the hukm of a traveller.

第一组以“先知（愿主的赞颂与祝福降临于他）在麦加停留三天，并在他的副朝（Umrah）期间缩短了拜功”这一传述为依据来论证其观点。然而，这并不能证明缩短拜功的期限仅限于此；事实上，它只说明：当旅行者的停留时间为三天或更短时，应当缩短拜功。 第二组以先知ﷺ在麦加停留并缩短拜功的传述为依据来论证其观点。据某些版本记载，他这样做了约十五天；另有（不同的）传述则作十七天、十八天或十九天。此段记载见于布哈里的著作。每种版本都有一些学者采纳。 第三组以先知ﷺ在麦加进行朝觐期间的停留为依据，他在那期间缩短了四天的拜功。马立克学派以“使者（愿主的赞颂与祝福降临于他）ﷺ为旅行者在麦加规定了三天，即在完成仪式之后”这一传述来支持其观点。在他们看来，这表明三天的停留并不会使“旅行者”这一称谓不再适用于停留者，这也是各方共同认可的观点。他们努力从先知ﷺ的行为中推导出这一结论，即：当某人打算停留时，何时“旅行者”这一称谓便不再适用于他（这一问题的答案）。因此，他们一致认为：如果“旅行者”这一称谓在某个期限内并未对他解除，那么根据其中一位学者的观点，即使因某种障碍阻止他继续旅程，而停留时间被无限延长（惟愿真主意欲如此），他仍将继续缩短拜功。 那些考虑到他停留的最短期限的人，据此对对手援引的他停留的最长期限作出了解释。例如，马立克学派认为，先知ﷺ在攻克麦加后停留了十五天，但他在停留期间始终意图不超过四天。同样的论证也可用于他们所确定的期限。

The first group argued for their opinion on the. basis of the report “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) stayed at Makka for three days and curtailed his prayer during his himra”. There is no evidence in this that this is the limit for curtailing prayers, in fact, it does furnish an evidence that the traveller is to curtail prayers when the stay is for three days or less. The second group argued for their opinion on the basis of the report that he (the Prophet) stayed at Makka and curtailed his prayers. This he did for about fifteen days in some versions, while it is also narrated (variously) as seventeen days, eighteen days, or nineteen days. This is recorded by al-BukharT. Each version was adopted by some group. The third group argued on the basis of the stay of the Prophet (God’s peace and,blessings be upon him) at Makka for his hajj during which he offered curtailed prayers for four days. The Malikites supported their opinion with the report “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) determined three days for the traveller at Makka after he had completed the rituals”. This indicates in their view that a stay of three days does not stop the term “traveller” from being applicable to the person staying, and this is the point that was made by all. They strove to derive this from the acts of the Prophet'(God’s peace and blessings be upon him), that is, (the answer to the question of) when the term “traveller” is not applicable to the person who intends to stay. For this reason they agreed that if the term “traveller” is not lifted from him up to a certain period, on the basis of the opinion of one of them, the person will continue to curtail prayers if some impediment is preventing him (from resuming his journey) even if the 'stay is prolonged indefinitely (with the will of Allah). Those who took into account the minimum period of his stay interpreted the maximum period of his stay, invoked by the rival, on the basis of this reasoning. Thus, the Malikites, for example, said that the fifteen days for which the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) stayed after the conquest of Makka, he did s0 while constantly intending that he would not stay more than four days. The i ame argument can be valid against the time that they determined.

"It is better for the mujtahid in such cases to follow one of two methods. He should assign the hukm to the maximum period of stay that has been reported during which the Prophet ﷺ curtailed his prayers. He should fix this as the limit since not curtailing is the original principle and it is therefore necessary that this period not be increased except on the basis of an evidence. The alternative is to uphold that the original principle is based on the minimum period on which a consensus has taken place and the reports about the Prophet ﷺ that he stayed for periods in excess of this minimum during which his prayers were curtailed; this is because it is likely that it is permitted to the traveller. Further, it is also likely that he stayed with the intention of staying for the (minimum) period permitted to the traveller, but that it occurred to him that he should stay longer. When there is an ambiguity, it is necessary to uphold the principle. The minimum that has been asserted on the issue is one day and night, and this is the opinion of Rabi'a ibn Abi 'Abd al-Rahman. It is related from al-Hasan al-Basri that the traveller is always to curtail prayers, except when he stays at one of the cities. This is based on the assumption that the term "travelling" is applicable to him till he approaches one of the cities. These, then, are the governing issues related to curtailment of prayers." Chinese (Simplified) translation: "对于此类情况，mujtahid（穆智台希德，指有资格独立推论教法的学者）最好遵循以下两种方法之一。他应当将律例定为已有记载的、先知ﷺ缩短拜功的最长停留期限。他应以此作为上限，因为不缩短拜功是原则，因此除非有证据，否则不应延长这一期限。另一种方法是坚持：原则是以已达成共识的最短期限为依据；而关于先知ﷺ停留超过此最短期限、期间仍缩短拜功的记载，则是因为旅行者在此期间被允许缩短拜功。此外，也有可能他原本打算停留的正是旅行者被允许的（最短）期限，只是后来他又想多停留一段时间。当存在不确定性时，就必须坚持原则。关于此问题所确立的最短期限是一昼夜，这是Rabi'a ibn Abi 'Abd al-Rahman（拉比尔·伊本·阿卜杜·拉赫曼）的观点。据传，al-Hasan al-Basri（哈桑·巴士里）认为，旅行者始终应当缩短拜功，除非他停留在某座城市中。这是基于这样一种假设：只要旅行者尚未抵达某座城市，"旅行"一词对他而言仍然适用。以上便是与缩短拜功相关的主要议题。"

’ It is better for the mujtahid in such cases to follow one of two methods. He t should assign the hukm to the maximum period of stay that has been reported I during which the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) curtailed I his prayers. He should fix this as the limit since not curtailing is the original | principle and it is therefore necessary that this period not be increased except ! on the basis of an evidence. The alternative is to uphold that the original J principle is based on the minimum period on which a consensus has taken ■ place and the reports about the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he stayed for periods in excess of this minimum during which his prayers were curtailed; this is because it is likely that it is permitted to the traveller. Further, it is also likely that he stayed with the intention of staying for the (minimum) period permitted to the traveller, but that it occurred to him that''he should stay longer. When there is an ambiguity, it is necessary to uphold the principle. The minimum that has been asserted on the issue is one day and night, and this is the opinion of RabTa ibn AbT *Abd al-Rahman. It is related from al-Hasan al-BasrT that the traveller is always to curtail prayers, except when he stays at one of the cities. This is based on* the assumption that the term “travelling” is applicable to him till he approaches one of the cities. These, then, are the governing issues related to curtailment of prayers.

三个问题与合并礼拜的主题相关。第一是它的合法性。第二是合并礼拜的方式。第三是合并时所允许的事项。

Three issues are related to the topic of combining prayers. First is its permissibility. Second, the manner of combining prayers. Third, things permissible in combining.

关于合并拜功的许可性，法学家们一致认为：朝觐者在阿拉法特日于晌礼时间合并晌礼与哺礼是圣行（逊奈）；在穆兹达利法合并昏礼与宵礼，于宵礼时间进行，同样是圣行（逊奈）。他们对于这两种情况之外的合并拜功则存在分歧。多数学者允许这样做，但对于允许与不允许的具体情形意见不一。艾卜·哈尼法及其门生则绝对禁止这样做。

About the permissibility of combining prayers, the jurists agreed that combining zuhr and <asr at the time of zuhr at *Arafa (by a pilgrim) is a sunna, and combining maghrib and Hsh& at Muzdalifa at the time of %sha> is also a sunna. They disagreed^ about combining prayers on occasions other than these. The majority permitted it, but disagreed as to the occasions on which this is permitted and those on which it is not. Abu Harnfa and his disciples prohibited this absolutely.

他们之间产生分歧的原因，在于对援引来支持合并礼拜的圣训的理解存在争议，以及这些圣训能否作为合并礼拜合法性的依据。所有这些圣训记载的都是行为而非言语，而行为比言语更容易有广泛的解释空间。其次，对这些圣训的真实性也存在争议。第三，关于在此问题上能否运用类比推理，也存在分歧。因此，正如你所看到的，分歧的原因有三个。

The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute about the interpretation of the traditions that are cited in support of combining prayers and their employment as legal evidence for the permissibility of jam*. All of them comprise acts and not words, and acts are subject to wider interpretation more than are words. Second, there is a dispute about the authenticity of the traditions. Third, there is a disagreement about the permissibility of employing analogy in this. Thus, there are three reasons for disagreement, as you can see.

关于人们对其解释存在分歧的圣训，包括安纳斯的圣训。这一圣训经公认为可靠，由布哈里和穆斯林辑录。他说：“真主的使者（愿真主的慈颜和祝福降临于他）在太阳偏西之前出行时，便推迟祷告宰赫尔，直至阿斯尔的时间，然后下骑，将两拜合并。若太阳在出发前已经偏西，他便先礼宰赫尔拜，然后乘骑。”其中也包括伊本·欧麦尔的圣训，同样由两位圣训学家（布哈里和穆斯林）辑录。他说：“我曾见真主的使者（愿真主的慈颜和祝福降临于他）在赶路时（因某种原因而急行），推迟昏礼，使其与宵礼合并。”第三段是伊本·阿拔斯的圣训，由马立克和穆斯林辑录。他说：“真主的使者（愿真主的慈颜和祝福降临于他）在没有恐惧或旅行的情况下，将宰赫尔与阿斯尔合并礼拜，将昏礼与宵礼合并礼拜。”主张允许合并拜功的学者对这段圣训的解释是：他推迟礼宰赫尔拜，直至阿斯尔拜的时间，然后将两拜合并。科法学派则认为，他是在宰赫尔拜的末段时间礼了宰赫尔拜，并在其首段时间礼了阿斯尔拜，这与关于吉卜利勒领拜的记载相符。他们说，应当按此方式解释伊本·阿拔斯的圣训，因为学者一致认为：在没有合理理由的情况下，不得在某拜的规定时间内礼另一拜。 他们还以伊本·麦斯欧德的传述作为其观点的依据。伊本·麦斯欧德说："以除他之外别无应受崇拜者的主发誓，安拉的使者（愿主之福与平安降临于他）除了所合并的两拜——阿拉法的晌礼与asr礼，以及穆兹达里法的昏礼与宵礼——之外，从未在非其定时的时候礼过任何一拜。"他们还说："这些圣训既可以解释为我们所说的意思，也可以解释为你们所说的意思。然而，拜功的固定时间以及在时间内礼拜，已经得到确立，而从已确立的原则转向有待解释的事务是不允许的。"

The traditions about whose interpretation they disagreed, include the tradition of Anas, which is authentic by agreement and is recorded by ak Bukhari and Muslim. He said, “When the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to travel before the declining of the sun, he delayed zuhr till the time of W, when he used to descend (from his mount) and combine the two. If, however, the sun had declined before the commencement of the journey, he used to pray zuhr and then ride”. They also include the tradition of Ibn TJmar, which too is recorded by the two Shaykhs (akBukharl and Muslim). He said, “I have seen the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), when he was hastening his journey (for some reason), delaying maghrib so that he would combine it with Hsh#”. The third is the tradition of Ibn <Abbas, recorded by Malik and Muslim. He said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prayed zuhr and ‘asr combined and maghrib and Ssha* combined, in the absence of (a cause for) fear or journey”. Those who uphold the permissibility of combining prayers interpreted this tradition to mean that he delayed praying zuhr till the time fixed for W and then combined the two. The Kofis maintained that he prayed zuhr in its last timing and in its first timing in accordance with what is related about the imama of Jibril. They said that it is proper that the tradition of Ibn cAbbas be interpreted this way as there is consensus on the point that without a valid excuse, two prayers are not to be offered in the time fixed for one of them. They also argued for their interpretation on the basis of the tradition of Ibn Mascud, who said, “By Him, besides Whom there is no god, the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) did not offer a prayer, ever, other than in its appointed timing, except the two prayers that he combined: zuhr and <asr at cArafa, and maghrib and S'sAif at Muzdalifa [jam^\ They also said, “It is possible to interpret these traditions to mean what we have said or to mean what you have said. The fixed timings of prayers and their performance within the timings, however, has been established, and it is not permitted to .move away from an established principle to a matter that is subject to interpretation”.

那些主张在旅途中合并拜功的学者,对其具体方式存在分歧。其中一些人认为,最好将第一拜推迟,与第二拜一同礼拜;但如果二者在第一拜的时间之内合并,这也是允许的。这是马立克的一则传述。另一些人则认为两种方式同等,即第二拜可以提前至第一拜的时间,或者反过来。这是沙斐仪的观点,也是马立克通过麦地那法学家传述的一则说法,而前一种说法则是伊本·嘎西姆从他那里传述的。根据马立克的看法,这种合并方式(将第一拜推迟至第二拜的时间)更为优选,因为它已经通过安proofs·本·马立克的圣训得到确立。 主张两种方式同等的学者,依据的原则是:优选不能以可信度(ʿadala)为依据,也就是说,不能因为某一传述者的可信度高于另一位,就优先采用其圣训来确定实践的义务。因此,只要穆阿兹的圣训经证实为真实可靠,就有义务遵行,正如只要安·本·马立克那则圣训的传述者可信度得到确立,就有义务遵行一样;即便其中一则圣训的传述者可信度比另一则更强,也是如此。

Those who .upheld the combining of prayer during a journey differed about its manner. Some of them said that it is preferable to delay the first prayer and offer it with the second prayer, however, if they are combined within the timing of the, first this is also permitted. This is one narration from Malik. Some of them deemed the two equal, that is, the second may be advanced to the timing of the first or it may be the other way round. This is akShafWs opinion and is a narration from Malik through the jurists of Medina, while the first has been related by Ibn akQasim from him. This kind of combination (delaying the first to the time of the second) is preferable according to Malik, as it has been established through the tradition of Anas. Those who considered the two methods as equal relied on the principle that preference is not undertaken on the basis of ^adala, that is, one <adala is not be preferred over another <adala for determining the obligation of acting upon the tradition. This means that if the tradition of Mu<adh is proved authentic it is obligatory to act upon it, just as it is obligatory to act upon the tradition of Anas, if the 'addla of the transmitters of both traditions is established, and even if the ^addla of the transmitters of one tradition is stronger than that of the other.

那些主张可以合并拜功的学者一致认为，旅行是允许合并拜功的原因之一。他们在城镇之内能否合并拜功，以及允许合并拜功的旅行条件上存在分歧：有人认为任何形式的旅行，无论性质如何，都是合并拜功的有效理由；另有人则规定了特定的旅行形式和特定种类的拜功。马立克属于规定特定旅行形式的学者之一，依据的是伊本·嘉西姆转述的他的观点。他说，旅行者除非旅途使他感到艰难，否则不应合并拜功。沙斐仪则属于不作此规定的学者，这也是马立克的另一种传述。持马立克这一观点的人依据的是伊本·欧麦尔的话：“我见过安拉的使者ﷺ在旅途中（因某种原因）急于赶路时，推迟日落拜，以便将其与夜拜合并。”而不持此观点的人则采用了艾奈斯等人圣训的表面含义。

Those who upheld the permissibility of combining prayers agreed that travel is one of the causes permitting the combining of prayers. They disagreed about combining prayers within a settlement and also about the conditions of travel that permits it, as some of them considered any kind of journey, whatever its nature, to be a valid cause for combining prayers, while others stipulated a particular form and a particular kind of prayer. Malik is one of those who stipulate a particular form of journey, according to the narration of Ibn ak Qasim from him. He said that the traveller is not to combine prayers unless the journey becomes cumbersome for him. Al-ShafiT is among those who did not stipulate this, and this is also one narration from Malik. Those who adopted this opinion (Malik’s) relied on the saying of Ibn TJmar “I have seen the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), when he was hastening his journey (for some reason), delaying maghrib so that he would combine it with Sshff”. Those who did not hold this opinion adopted the apparent meaning of the traditions of Anas and others.

同样地,正如我们所说,他们在哪种旅程中允许合并(两种)拜功这一问题上也存在分歧。有人认为,它只适用于出于虔诚目的的旅程,例如朝觐或圣战(吉哈德),这是伊本·卡西姆所传述之圣训的表面含义。有人认为,它适用于任何合法的旅程(无论出于虔诚目的,还是出于其他正当目的),而不适用于为非法目的而进行的旅程。这是沙斐仪的观点,也是麦地那学者从马立克所传述之圣训的表面含义。他们产生分歧的原因,与他们在缩短拜功的旅程问题上产生分歧的原因相同,不过在那一问题上,其含义是普遍的,因为缩短拜功既有言语上的传述,也有行为上的传述(来自先知ﷺ),而合并拜功则只有行为上的传述。那些将其限定于先知ﷺ曾合并拜功之旅程种类的人,不允许在其他种类的旅程中合并拜功;而那些视之为旅行者的一种优惠(rukhsa)的人,则认为它在其他旅程中也是有效的。

Similarly, they disagreed, as we have said, about the kind of journey in which combining (of the prayers) is permitted. Some said that it is a journey motivated by piety, like hajj or war (jihad), and this is the apparent meaning of the narration of Ibn al-Qasim. Some said that it is a journey that is permissible (motivated by piety or undertaken for any legitimate purpose), as against a journey undertaken for unlawful ends. This is al-ShafiTs opinion and the apparent meaning of the narration of the Medinites from Malik. The reason for their disagreement over this is the same as the reason for their disagreement over a journey during which prayer is curtailed, although in that case the meaning is general, as curtailment has been reported both through words and acts (of the Prophet), while combining has been reported through acts alone. Those who confined it to the kinds of journey in which the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) combined his prayers did not permit it in other kinds of journeys, while those who considered it a kind of exemption (rukhsa) for the traveller deemed it valid in other journeys as well.