Women's Right to Travel in the Quran: A Philological and Theological Examination of the Word "Saihat"

Throughout Islamic history, the question of women's freedom of travel has been debated primarily on the basis of hadith literature and jurisprudential traditions, while the language and concepts employed by the Quran itself have been largely overlooked. Yet when the Quran is evaluated within its own internal coherence, it becomes clear that it positions women not as passive, homebound figures, but as active, mobile subjects participating in public life. The Philological Origin and Semantic Field of the Word "Saihat" Beginning from a linguistic perspective is essential for placing this discussion on sound footing. The word "seyahat" (travel), widely used in Turkish, is not of Turkish origin. When one considers Turkish vowel harmony rules — both the major and minor forms — it becomes immediately apparent that "seyahat," containing both the vowels "e" and "a," violates these rules. This is a clear indicator that the word is of foreign origin. Its root lies in the Arabic "siyaha," which passed into Persian as "seyahat" and from there into Turkish. Another word derived from the same Arabic root is "saihat." There is a subtle but important semantic distinction between the two. While "seyahat" denotes a planned, purposeful journey from one point to another, "saihat" evokes roaming, wandering, and being in a state of free and exploratory movement. In Turkish equivalents, "gezmek" (to travel) is closer to seyahat, while "dolaşmak" (to wander, roam) is closer to saihat. This semantic framework shows that every saihat is a form of seyahat, but not every seyahat qualifies as saihat. Quranic Verses Containing the Word "Saihat" Words derived from this root appear in three different verses of the Quran. The first is the expression "fesihu fil ard" in verse 2 of Surah At-Tawbah, translated as "roam/travel through the land" — containing an explicit emphasis on freedom of movement. The meaning is entirely clear: physical movement, travel, and the exploration of the earth. The second is the word "saihune" in verse 112 of the same surah. This verse, enumerating the qualities of believing individuals, uses this word to mean "those who roam/travel." Here too there is no semantic ambiguity; "saihune" plainly means individuals who move and travel. The third — and the one at the center of the debate — is the word "saihatin" in verse 5 of Surah At-Tahrim. In this verse, God says: "If he divorces you, perhaps his Lord will give him in exchange wives better than you — submissive, faithful, obedient, repentant, worshipful, given to fasting, previously married, and virgins." Among the qualities listed in this verse, "saihatin" also appears, and the addressees are explicitly women. From a linguistic standpoint, the meaning of this word is unambiguous: women who roam, travel, and move freely. Yet in many Quran translations, this word is rendered as "women who fast." Semantic Shift or Distortion? At this point, one must pause and ask: How can it be explained that a word derived from the same root, formed with the same verbal pattern, is accepted as meaning "roaming, traveling" in Surah At-Tawbah, yet is rendered as "fasting" in Surah At-Tahrim — precisely when the addressees are women? The Arabic words for "fasting" in the Quran are "sawm" or "siyam," and neither of these appears in At-Tahrim 5:5. Despite this, the overwhelming majority of translators prefer to render "saihatin" as "fasting women" — a choice that must stem not from linguistic necessity, but from an ideological presupposition. That presupposition is this: women should not roam, should not travel, and their freedom of movement should be restricted. Yet when one examines the Quran's own internal coherence, there is no linguistic or theological justification to support such a distinction. If "saihat" means "one who roams" for men in Surah At-Tawbah, it must carry the same meaning for women in Surah At-Tahrim. Otherwise, what is being done is not interpreting the Quranic text — it is rewriting it. The Story of Mary: An Independent Female Figure One of the most powerful concrete examples the Quran offers regarding women and travel is the story of Mary in Surah Maryam. Verse 16 states: "And mention in the Book, Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east." This verse depicts a woman withdrawing alone to a place apart from her family — that is, moving independently. Moreover, the Quran presents this not with any criticism or warning, but entirely within a positive framework, as part of a woman's life. No requirement of a male guardian (mahram) accompanying her is stipulated; this solitary journey is not condemned. On the contrary, Mary is presented as one of the most exalted figures in Quranic history. This story goes beyond abstract linguistic debate and serves as a powerful concrete example that gives substance to women's right to travel and independent movement. The Relationship Between the Right to Travel and Other Fundamental Rights Restricting women's freedom of travel cannot be reduced to a mere question of "going and coming." Such restriction simultaneously eliminates numerous interconnected fundamental rights. The right to education is foremost among these. A woman accepted to a university in another city who cannot make the journey alone because she has no male guardian is effectively deprived of her right to education. The right to work is similarly affected. A woman who finds employment in a location different from where she resides, but cannot take advantage of that opportunity, faces one of the greatest obstacles to her economic independence. The right to worship may be the most striking of all. Hajj — one of the pillars of Islam — cannot be performed by a woman who is unable to travel alone; this amounts to the seizure of both a religious and personal right. At this point, the following question becomes unavoidable: if the traditional view restricting women's travel effectively eliminates these fundamental rights, can it genuinely be argued that this view has a religious foundation? The Theological Impasse of the Traditional Interpretation The traditional view holding that women cannot travel alone draws its argument primarily from certain hadith. Yet the Quran, both in its own conceptual wholeness and through the exemplary figures it presents, paints a clear picture incompatible with this restriction. The consistent meaning of "saihat" throughout the Quran, Mary's independent movement, and the general language the Quran uses for believing individuals — active, mobile, thinking subjects — do not permit the positioning of women as passive, confined, and dependent figures. To perpetuate a traditional restriction by ignoring or distorting the clear expressions of a religion's sacred text does not legitimize that restriction; it only reveals that tradition is being presented as though it were religious obligation. When the Quran's treatment of the concept of "saihat" is examined, a coherent and transparent semantic whole emerges: regardless of in which verse or toward whom this word is used, it carries the meaning of "an individual who roams, travels, and moves freely." The fact that this word qualifies women in At-Tahrim 5:5 is a direct Quranic affirmation that women, like men, are active, mobile, and independent individuals. Translators who render this word as "fasting women" are not only without linguistic basis — they are also contradicting the Quran's overall semantic coherence. The story of Mary reinforces this linguistic finding with a concrete example from life. The Quran places women not outside of life, but at its very center. A woman's right to travel is an inseparable part of her right to education and work, her freedom of worship, and most fundamentally, her human dignity. To restrict this right through linguistic manipulation or traditional assumption is to speak with the voice of tradition — not the voice of the Quran.