Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
Regarding the instruction in this hadith about claiming the right of hospitality from the host against his will, the hadith scholars (muhaddithin) have presented various explanations.

➊ Some scholars have written that this ruling pertains to a situation of dire necessity (makhmasah).
In the remote areas of the desert and villages, especially in the context of Arabia, if a traveler arrived, there was no means for him to obtain food and drink except through the hospitality of the desert dwellers (ahl al-badiyah).
Thus, the meaning is that if such a situation arises and the people of the tribe refuse to offer hospitality, while the traveling warriors (mujahideen) have no provisions with them, then in order to save their lives, they may take food and drink from them even against their will.
Such dispensations exist in Islam for times of dire necessity (makhmasah).

➋ Another explanation is that hospitality (diyafah) was a common custom and tradition among the Arabs.
Therefore, in light of this custom, the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) gave this instruction to the mujahideen.

➌ One explanation is also that the Noble Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) had made agreements with many Arab tribes that if the Muslim army passed through their tribe and stayed with them for a day or two, they would provide hospitality to the army.
This agreement is present in those letters (makatib) of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) which he sent to the chiefs of the Arab tribes.
And the referencing (takhrij) of these has also been done by Zayla'i.

In any case, various explanations have been given for this.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
In financial matters, there is allowance that forcibly seized property can be reclaimed by any means; however, this ruling does not apply to corporal punishments. In such cases, it is necessary to refer to the authority of the time, that is, the court.

(2)
Apparently, this hadith indicates that hospitality is obligatory. If someone does not offer hospitality, the guest may forcibly take his right. But according to the majority of hadith scholars, hospitality (diyafah) is an emphasized Sunnah (sunnah mu’akkadah), and the mentioned hadith pertains to those compelled individuals whose provisions for the journey have run out and who have nothing to eat or drink. According to our inclination, it refers to those people who used to travel to Muslim-conquered territories for some purpose, and at that time, there was no official arrangement for hospitality, so the local residents would host them. Nowadays, since there are official arrangements or salaried staff, it is no longer obligatory, but it remains a moral duty that such people should make arrangements for hospitality.

Hadith Commentary:
Most scholars state that this ruling was in accordance with the prevalent custom in Arabia at the beginning of Islam, when it was necessary for the residents of a place where travelers stopped during their journey to arrange for their food and drink.
Today is the era of hotels, but the intent of the hadith is still obligatory to act upon: it is necessary to take care of guests.
Maulvi Abdul Haq bin Fazlullah Ghaznawi, who was a direct student of Imam Shawkani and from whom the translator (Waheeduz-Zaman) studied in his youth, was a great follower of the Sunnah and a seeker of truth.
The respected Maulana had a rule that whenever he visited someone’s home, he would never eat for more than three days; after three days, he would make his own arrangements.
(rahimahullah)

Hadith Commentary: Benefits and Issues: This hadith establishes that if the Islamic government sends a detachment or a party somewhere, then the people of that area should host them as guests. However, Imam Ahmad has deduced from this that if, in a certain area, a guest cannot obtain food for a price—because there is no hotel there—then in such a place, it is obligatory upon the people to provide hospitality. According to Imam Layth, it is obligatory upon the people of every place. But according to the majority (jumhur), hospitality to guests is an emphasized Sunnah (sunnah mu’akkadah), not an obligation (fard), and therefore it cannot be collected by force, except in the case where the guest is helpless and suffering from hunger. The correct view is that this matter was related to the officials of the Islamic government, because at that time, resources were not so widespread that the government could arrange food and accommodation for them everywhere. But now the government arranges this and provides funds for it, so now it is not permissible. Otherwise, how could one or two guests have the ability to forcibly claim their right from someone?

Benefits and Issues:
➊
It is obligatory for the residents of a town to fulfill the needs of food, drink, and accommodation for a government employee who comes to carry out official duties.

➋
Nowadays, in large cities, official arrangements are made for the accommodation of such employees; officers should stay there and should not burden any subordinate.

➌
When a government employee is provided with travel expenses, etc. (T.A./D.A.) by the government, the employee should fulfill his needs within reasonable limits from this. He should not be extravagant or make false statements to receive more money than what is permissible.