Are religious concessions (Rukhas) permissible during a journey undertaken for sin (Safar al-Ma'siyah)?

Primary text

Concessions, such as shortening prayer or breaking the fast, are not permissible during a journey undertaken for sin, such as escaping servitude (Ibaq), highway robbery (Qat' al-Tariq), or trading in prohibited items like alcohol. Ahmad affirmed this ruling. This position aligns with the implication of Al-Khiraqi's text, which restricted concessions to obligatory or permissible acts. This view is also held by Al-Shafi'i. The evidence is the verse regarding necessity: "But whoever is forced by necessity, neither willful nor transgressing, there is no sin upon him" (Quran 2:173). Ibn Abbas interpreted 'neither willful nor transgressing' as one who is not rebellious against the Muslims, one who has not left their community, and one who does not threaten travelers. Concessions are legislated to aid in achieving a permissible objective; extending them to sinful acts would imply legislating aid for achieving forbidden outcomes, which is contrary to the Law. Furthermore, the scriptural evidences concerning concessions were narrated regarding the companions whose journeys were permissible, thus the ruling does not apply to those whose journey violates the established norm.